Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: goodsamaritan on May 06, 2009, 03:42:24 pm
-
I would like us to share animal medicine experiences and hearsays, folklore and documented uses.
If there is a herbal medicine issue thread, then there should be an animal medicine thread.
For Example:
Python Bile
- unexplained stomach aches
- seems to rid of undigested material in the stomach and intestines
- digests wastes on the skin such as eczema (my experience)
Turtle Meat
- experience of a friend fed turtle meat to his asthmatic child, cured
- chinese folklore says it is good for the liver, good for clear smooth skin
Raw eggs
- used to flush the liver, cleanse the liver
- multivitamins
Beef fat
- helps heal wounds when used topically?
Pigs' Pancreas
- dissolves cancer tumors when taken internally
-
My inclination would be to ban any discussion of medicine involving animal parts from rare species such as pythons, tigers, bears etc. Taking parts from such wild animals is illegal, worldwide, even if not properly enforced. Parts of other more common animals like pigs is OK.
-
I wouldn't be against a discussion of what various parts of various animals eaten can do to you, but not in an encouring way if those animals are protected by laws or endangered etc.
-
Eating raw goat liver / raw beef liver helps regenerate / heal livers?
- I guess it does, cancer patients have been cured with the help of daily raw liver consumption
Eating raw goat kidneys / raw beef kidneys helps regenerate kidneys?
-
That's mostly common sense stuff, the like treats like idea.
-
In the continent of africa, they have ointment type antibiotics made from CROCODILE... don't exactly know which parts.
-----------
*** Note: These are advertisements of seller websites ***
*** I have no idea if these claims are true ***
Crocodile Oil
Skin protector and healing agent
Improving the healing process in wounds, lesions and preventing scar formation
Crocodile Oil is highly regarded as wonder oil for the skin.
We highly recommend Crocodile Oil as the first choice to use to repair and heal the skin after using Mole & Wart EZ Clear
*** link removed ***
-----------
Crocodile meat is an exotic meat delicacy around the world and is one of the health meats of the 21st century. A crocodile of 1.6 meter (slaughtering length) will weigh on average 16kg and will produce 10kg of meat for selling purposes. Crocodile soup is a centuries old Chinese cure for asthma and respiratory problems.
*** link removed ***
NOTE: Lex is right, these are peddlers of "magic" stuff.
-
That's funny because crocs have dry scaly skin that no one would want. Not saying their oil would give you that, just that it's a funny coincidence.
-
MY inclination would be to ban any discussion of medicine involving animal parts from rare species such as pythons, tigers, bears etc. Taking parts from such are wild animals is illegal, worldwide, even if not properly enforced. Parts of other more common animals like pigs is OK.
My inclination is to ban any discussion of medicine at all. It has no place on this forum. Wart Removers, Liver Flushes, Python bile for indigestion, Pig guts to cure cancer, what nonsense. Pedal your Snake Oil and magic elixirs on another website. This thread violates the whole premise of this forum.
Lex
-
The current liver cancer / cirrhosis sufferer I'm coaching is on raw paleolithic diet to reverse his terminal status.
So far his cirrhosis symptoms are gone, his liver is flowing now.
His "treatment" is living a raw paleo diet and lifestyle.
The lifestyle is clean, chemical free.
-----------
His current diet is: fresh raw oranges juiced in water, other raw fruit juices, raw veggie juice + 5 raw fertilized egg yolks, 2 ounces raw goat liver, 1/2 kilo ground raw fatty beef daily.
-----------
Some people who are non-paleo may look at raw egg yolks, raw goat liver and ground raw fatty beef as "medicine". Of course, we aren't peddling anything because they can purchase these regular items themselves.
-
The like cures like theory can be problematic, morally. After all, if like cures like, then the healthiest food to cure a sick human's liver would presumably be the fresh, raw liver of a long-term rawpaleodieter, not python-liver or whatever. Just a thought! -d
One thing's for sure, we don't need to eat the organs of an exotic, endangered species such as pythons, tigers or bears - standard pig/sheep/goat etc. organs will do fine. Chinese Medicine, in this regard, has done untold harm to local wildlife because of this curious notion of the more exotic the animal, the more supposed powers it has. Cannibals, in the Palaeolithic and beyond, also had the notion that if they ate the heart of a sabre-toothed tiger that they would gain the strength, speed and health of that tiger, or that they would gain an enemy's powers if they ate his body etc.
-
The current liver cancer / cirrhosis sufferer I'm coaching is on raw paleolithic diet to reverse his terminal status.
So far his cirrhosis symptoms are gone, his liver is flowing now.
His "treatment" is living a raw paleo diet and lifestyle.
The lifestyle is clean, chemical free.
-----------
His current diet is: fresh raw oranges juiced in water, other raw fruit juices, raw veggie juice + 5 raw fertilized egg yolks, 2 ounces raw goat liver, 1/2 kilo ground raw fatty beef daily.
-----------
None of this sounds much like paleo. You'd rarely find egg yolks in the wild - they'd be well on their way to little birds in most cases, and very seasonal at best. I haven't seen any accounts of anyone finding a juicer in the caves with paleo bones, though I'm sure there are many in our modern landfills where they belong. Chemical free doesn't mean paleo, nor does organic, both of which really mean nothing since everything we eat is made up of chemicals, and is derived from living organisms. The addition of a bit of raw meat to an otherwise non-paleo diet doesn't make it paleo. It's like saying the French are paleo because they eat raw goose livers and steak tartar with their wine, cheese, and baguette.
Based on what you've presented, this person is certainly not living a paleo lifestyle - just a hokey mishmash of new age healing protocols mixed with a bit of raw meat which masquerades as paleo. Many of us have found your "juice" regimen to actually be quite harmful and certainly not helpful. My guess is that this person's improvement is due more to stopping the behaviour that caused the liver cancer/cirrhosis than to the "healing" protocol you've prescribed. They'd probably do even better without the load of sugars and anti-nutrients from the juices.
The liver doesn't "flow", bile does, and bile production is just one of hundreds of complex functions that the liver performs. The term "flow" is meaningless nonsense and doesn't tell anyone anything about the liver's ability to properly perform its functions.
Of course, we aren't peddling anything because they can purchase these regular items themselves.
You are peddling nonsense and prescribing "healing" protocols. You demonstrate this yourself by the examples you give - You call them "treatments'. This should have no place on this forum. We are not doctors and have no business pretending otherwise.
I understand that some people may be drawn to a radical change in diet like raw paleo in an attempt to overcome a health issue, but our purpose should be to clearly explain what paleo is, the issues with transition, our personal experiences, and discuss the various issues people encounter as they try this way of life including the social consequences. We should be making no claims that this lifestyle will heal terminal illness, or be prescribing any "healing" protocols for specific ailments. If a person feels that our experiences demonstrate that it is worthwile for them to try paleo on their own, I'm glad to help them understand what I went through and what they can expect as they transition. This is not a "treatment" as you call it. It is just one of the many different dietary and lifestyle choices available. It has no more or less to do with "healing" than any other available dietary and lifestyle choices.
Please consider healing the sick on your other websites. This one is about a raw paleo diet and lifestyle, not new age healing practices.
Lex
-
re the claim:- "We should be making no claims that this lifestyle will heal terminal illness"
This one idea I very strongly disagree with. The vast majority of people who turn to RAF diets do so solely out of a desire to regain their health which was invariably previously lost on a cooked/processed diet - I'm a good example - if I'd been reasonably healthy(ie bit overweight but with no other issues, I would never have dreamt of going rawpalaeo and would have stuck to eating crisps(aka "chips" in US slang?) and other junk food. If we were to make no health-claims at all, then the only motivation for people to become RAFers would be to do it purely out of a need to rebel against the mainstream. Such people would only do this diet in the short-term as a fad diet, in most cases, due to the social issues involved etc. Besides, the fact that the rawpalaeodiet has indeed helped many people recover from terminal illness etc. is a major point in its favour and needs to be made clear via testimonials etc.
-
All arguments appreciated.
On to a lighter topic:
Seems RAW OYSTERS every couple of days increases sperm counts and ejaculate volume.
The fertility powers of oysters is a persistent folklore... persistent because it's true (in my case).
My testimony during my cooked eating times in 2002 when my wife and I were suffering for secondary infertility. I've always measured my sperm counts through the previous years and it remained stable at 100 million per ml. But in our attempt to have a baby I resorted to eating a lunch full of raw oysters 3 times a week.
After 1 month I got a new sperm count test and got 300 million per ml. That's a 300% increase just due to raw oysters. ;D
I couldn't believe the results... I went to the lab and asked the supervisor to verify if the sperm count test was correct. He vouched that he himself checked my sperm analysis and found the count to be accurate.
Oh yeah, a week later my wife tested positively pregnant with our 2nd boy. That's my boy on my avatar.
(in this infertility overcoming attempt we learned to quit all forms of drugs, all non edible lotions, threw away the microwave oven)
-
I haven't heard of anyone being cured of a terminal illness on RPD?
I wouldn't claim any RPD cures, from my experience RPD is difficult to follow when NOT suffering a terminal illness and the fact is RPD does appear to heal somethings it takes a bloody long time. I don't want to give false hope. There's no way a liver flush can cure cancer and eating RPD for a month won't do much at all.
My first 6 months of RPD were stressful...I didn't know what to eat. spent $$$..and too much made be detox really fast and I would get nightmares. I struggled. Now imagine trying this with stage 4 cancer. I can't.
RPD as helped me a lot. I can say my experience of RPD healed my thyroid and IBS but I wouldn't like anyone to say come our forum it cures thyroid condition's and IBS it's unfair and not true.
-
The fertility powers of oysters is a persistent folklore... persistent because it's true (in my case).
I find a lot of your so called "healing", sperm counts, chicks talk off-putting to put it mildly. On top of this why not post your own picture insted of your poor son having to hold his head in for you?
Lex has always been most reliable, trustworthy and down to earth with all his comments on the paleo life-style; he does not drift off in all kinds of directions (detox, so called "raw healing", AV, sperm counts, chicks...).
Nicola
-
I haven't heard of anyone being cured of a terminal illness on RPD?
I wouldn't claim any RPD cures, from my experience RPD is difficult to follow when NOT suffering a terminal illness and the fact is RPD does appear to heal somethings it takes a bloody long time. I don't want to give false hope. There's no way a liver flush can cure cancer and eating RPD for a month won't do much at all.
My first 6 months of RPD were stressful...I didn't know what to eat. spent $$$..and too much made be detox really fast and I would get nightmares. I struggled. Now imagine trying this with stage 4 cancer. I can't.
RPD as helped me a lot. I can say my experience of RPD healed my thyroid and IBS but I wouldn't like anyone to say come our forum it cures thyroid condition's and IBS it's unfair and not true.
I heartily disagree. For one thing, I've come across numerous testimonials on the web claiming that the primal diet etc. cured their various cancers. I've even come across some people claiming that a raw animal food diet got rid of the standard symptoms of a genetic illness(eg:- grave's disease, in one case).
Secondly, healing on a rawpalaeodiet can take years(especially if someone is old, having eaten processed foods for decades), but it can also heal some people very quickly - witness the numerous comments on the various boards re sudden increases in health after doing just a few weeks of a raw animal food diet(and remember, not everyone who starts this diet is deathly ill, some are just a bit ill, beforehand). I admit people make mistakes - I took c. 8 months to get to the right raw-diet-combination, but once I was on the right track, re removing raw dairy etc., all my most painful symptoms vanished quickly within 4 months after that. Granted , it took another c.1.5 to 2 years or so to get rid of absolutely all issues, but that is merely me as an individual - others take much less time to heal, depending on their condition.
-
My opinion is that the proper way to deal with advertising rpd's ability to heal would be to allow people to tell their own stories and use any relevant scientific information, but to not overstep either of these in generalizing what it can do.
-
I find a lot of your so called "healing", sperm counts, chicks talk off-putting to put it mildly.
If increase in sperm count puts you off, I'm sorry you feel that way, but that is not my intention.
If the word "chicks" bother you, I'm sorry about the cultural difference, maybe "chicks" is a bad word in your culture?
If you suffered and conquered infertility like me and my wife did, you would try anything and everything. I'm just sharing my true experience with raw oysters that increased my sperm count 300%. Just sharing our happiness and success. http://www.fertilityhelp.net/hip-hip-hooray-after-almost-13-mos-of-trying-we-are-pregnant
(http://www.fertilityhelp.net/hip-hip-hooray-after-almost-13-mos-of-trying-we-are-pregnant)
On top of this why not post your own picture insted of your poor son having to hold his head in for you?
It's a cultural thing among parents, at least in my country. We'd rather use the photos of our children as our avatars. My wife's picture on facebook is also one of our children. When you become a parent, you'll probably post your childrens' pics instead of yours. ;D
Lex has always been most reliable, trustworthy and down to earth with all his comments on the paleo life-style; he does not drift off in all kinds of directions (detox, so called "raw healing", AV, sperm counts, chicks...).
I'm not trying to be like Lex.
Lex in his journal also mentioned that he had a colonoscopy examination and the MD said his colon was like a 20 year old's colon. That was truly inspiring... in the same lines of healing testimonials.
----------------
My opinion is that the proper way to deal with advertising rpd's ability to heal would be to allow people to tell their own stories and use any relevant scientific information, but to not overstep either of these in generalizing what it can do.
Nice reminder, Kyle. Here's my story...
(http://www.eczemacure.info/home/uploads/images/pic_home.jpg)
I used to be really, really sick...
The same stuff you see on my face was also all over my left arm, and putting python bile on my left arm cured it overnight. In 2005 when we did this, python was not an endangered species. We bought our python gall bladders from a restaurant that served python. I watched my left arm clear up before my very eyes, I stayed up all night watching the python bile cure my left arm, it was amazing. Very sound detox principles, my own gall bladder was constipated, and on the suggestion of my anthroposophic doctor, led me to liver flushing with olive oil which healed me even further.
Even without raw food, the detox techniques I learned healed me a lot... but only as far as it could go.
I got into raw foods because a cooked diet with just detoxes wasn't enough to heal me. Raw vegan wasn't enough, raw fruitarian wasn't enough, fasting wasn't enough, RPD was the clincher (stumbled onto Wai Diet).
Aajonus Vonderplanitz' 2 books are all about healing (including detoxing) with raw food. I only got the idea of eating raw land animal meat from Aajonus. I owe him that. I also owe Geoff for teaching me RPD because raw dairy wasn't working for me. RPD completed my healing.
I'm trying to cure my eldest son's tooth decay and primary complex now (probably caused by our previous drift to vegetarianism); following the book http://www.curetoothdecay.com which has a lot of raw animals in it recommended. Wodgina's testimonial of his tooth decay cure / remineralization inspired me to do this for my son.
If RPD had no healing value for me I would have never been interested in it.
-
I did have a hole in my tooth which has appeared to fill up and smooth over. There's still a divet. I also get white gritty mineral? which appears to stick to the back of my teeth now and is hard to scrap off.
Geoff I still don't know anyone who has cured terminal illness on RPD I have heard some on the primal diet but a lot of cancers disappear on their own accord and a lot of people die of old age before cancer has the chance to get em'.
I think testimonials are a great advertisment for this diet.
-
I agree with Tyler that most people are drawn to any significant change in lifestyle due to health issues. As he was, so was I. I also agree that most peoples health will improve on a paleo style diet. My problem is with suggesting or prescribing specific foods, protocols, or herbal remedies etc. to cure specific diseases or terminal illness. We have no business making any recommendations here other than to say that following good dietary principal is vital to maintaining good health and people are free to experiment and discuss within the bounds of what we believe is the best approach which is a paleo lifestyle.
I believe that Kyle has the correct approach in that we tell our tales, within the limits of what the paleo lifestyle has accomplished for us, and let people decide for themselves. Guidance should be in the area of what foods constitute "paleo" and what foods don't as well as our reasoning behind excluding or including food categories. Our personal experiences with transitioning to these foods is certainly valid and as GS says, often inspirational as is discussing overall health improvements from adopting this lifestyle.
This is completely different than specifying what foods heal what ailment, or what herbal remedy will cure a specific health issue etc. In my case I have made a personal choice to eat a zero carb diet. I have detailed my own adventure which includes significant health improvements. I've also given my reasoning as to why I believe zero carb is probably a valid variation of a paleo diet, however, I don't think I've ever prescribed my specific eating habits as a cure for any specific health issue to anyone. I've only chronicled my own experience.
I also respect the focus of this board as being related to PALEO diets and lifestyles and don't discuss issues like "curing" illnesses with Colonel Sander's 11 herbs and spices, python piss, and pig guts. What I would talk about is that pig guts are probably good nutritional food from a paleo standpoint and any other claims for them such as curing illness are irrelevant to paleo. Seasoning food with culinary herbs and spices may be helpful for people transitioning to a paleo diet, but making claims that specific herbs cure specific illness is not appropriate. I wouldn't discuss python bile at all. It has no relevance to the topic of this forum. Penicillin cures infections as do sulfa drugs, but curing infections is not what this forum is about so I don't discuss these either. I also don't direct people to come to this forum to discuss cures for their infections, that's not what we are about.
Better health is often a benefit of eating a better diet - in fact it is the very foundation. Poor health often results from eating improper foods. We can make general cases for including meat and fat, (and maybe even a bit of fruit on occasion), and excluding vegetables, grains, and dairy. We can do this by discussing our own experiences with these categories of foods. We can discuss our experiences with cooked vs raw. And I think we can safely say that MOST people will experience some improvement in health. But to suggest specific foods, herbal remedies, or protocols to cure specific illnesses is out of bounds as far as I'm concerned.
GS may indeed have improved an infertility problem by changing his diet. No problem with statements like this. However, to offer a diet of specific foods, herbal supplements, and new age protocols as a CURE for infertility or anything else is just wrong. Herbal supplements, and new age protocols have nothing to do with the topic of this board and we are not here to offer cures for specific diseases. Rather we should focus on "demonstrating" through our own examples, that the core foundation of health is based on what you eat. Eat the proper foods and the rising tide of overall improved health should have a positive effect on all body functions.
GS, if you cut out all that fruit you eat (eating fruit for hydration is not paleo and bombards your body with large jolts of sugar - drink water for hydration instead), and send your vegetable juicer to the landfill where it belongs (juicing is not paleo and you'll be getting rid of all those plant alkaloids and anti-nutirents), you might find you don't need that python stuff (certainly not paleo) anymore and you can throw your liver flushes, colon cleansers, and herbal remedies in the rubbish bin as well. Just eat a real paleo style diet to give your body the best nutrition possible and let it take care of itself without all your silly meddling. This is not a specific prescription to cure anything, just a challange to reduce or eliminate non paleo foods from your diet (that's what this forum is about), and see what happens over the long haul. I'd really be interested in reading about the changes your body goes through in your journal and compare them with my experiences. I'm sure others would as well.
Just a thought.....
Lex
-
First of all, it's perfectly legitimate to claim the theory "like cures like". In other words, if someone has a damaged liver due to some disease, then it's perfectly legitimate to suggest to that person that he should eat healthy, raw livers from grassfed/organic/wild etc. animals as it is reasonably logical to assume that the nutrients from such a healthy liver could be reused by the person in question to rebuild his own liver. So (pastured) raw pig guts would be good for someone with damaged guts of their own etc. Naturally, of course, any such suggestion would have to be accompanied by a suggestion to also eat other raw foods as well - just eating raw liver alone for weeks would not be enough to maintain overall health.
Secondly, one of THE most common questions I've been faced with by RPDers is ":- I have multiple sclerosis/cancer etc., what foods do you recommend. Then, it is prefectly legitimate for me to point to concerns and studies linking grain-and-dairy consumption to multiple sclerosis, linking consumption of heat-created toxins to cancer via more studies etc. It is also legitimate for me to suggest a person eats raw liver if they have liver cancer, as mentioned above.
Also, people have asked me and others in the past how to cure a specific infection. Indeed, I seem to recall I did so in the early days.I'd have been most annoyed if I'd never gotten an answer due to overly rigid rules.
As regards herbal medicine, most of herbal medicine has already been widely substantiated in terms of both millenia of folklore and recent scientific studies. About the only herb which hasn't has been echinacea, last I checked. I'll grant that most modern herbal supplements are useless being highly processed, but raw wild herbs such as dandelion and hundreds of others have proven uses, and even herbal teas, provided they aren't heated too much. If you doubt that, try taking any raw wild herb(in sizeable amounts), known to cause excessive urination(I think dandelion counts?) and see what happens!
Re infertility:-Raw oysters have been widely reported by many RAFers in the past as benefitting their sperm-count/sexual activity(and not just RAFers) - I'm just one in a long line. So, again, it's perfectly OK, given that, to recommend raw oysters for infertility/sexual activity, provided it's not a 100% raw oyster-filled diet.
Re last paragraph or so:- This demonstrates a rather pro-zero-carb bias as being behind all the recent arguments, re the damning of fruit for hydration etc.. The fact is that most people in the world,define "palaeo" as a diet consisting of fruit, veg, meat and a rawpalaeo version would merely include raw versions of both. Now the ratios of raw plant-food within the Palaeolithic diet may be defined by a member as anywhere from 35% to 0%, but that is up to each forum member to decide.
I see no harm in mentioning alternative healing practices as long as they're put in the off-topic forum where they belong. I mean take the alexander technique which teaches good posture - now good posture was a characteristic of palaeo times, as they had no chairs and wouldn't have needed any alexander technique, but we live in an artificial world filled with beds and chairs etc. so may have need for alternative practices that mimic palaeo ways or whatever.
-
Case in point. On the other forum, someone asked about sunburn and aloe vera was mentioned by 1 person and I agreed, having had success with it, myself. So, I don't see how herbal medicine can simply be left out as it's such a palaeo characteristic.
-
I would say that recommending a plant or animal food that is within the bounds of the paleo diet would be more paleo than recommending a drug for curing an infection. Paleo people certainly COULD have used snake whatever to treat something. They probably didn't, or not very much.
Having said that, the legitimacy of this forum would be highest imo if it stuck to dietary talk as much as possible and didn't delve very far into anything else like curing illness.
-
GS, if you cut out all that fruit you eat (eating fruit for hydration is not paleo and bombards your body with large jolts of sugar - drink water for hydration instead), and send your vegetable juicer to the landfill where it belongs (juicing is not paleo and you'll be getting rid of all those plant alkaloids and anti-nutirents), you might find you don't need that python stuff (certainly not paleo) anymore and you can throw your liver flushes, colon cleansers, and herbal remedies in the rubbish bin as well. Just eat a real paleo style diet to give your body the best nutrition possible and let it take care of itself without all your silly meddling. This is not a specific prescription to cure anything, just a challange to reduce or eliminate non paleo foods from your diet (that's what this forum is about), and see what happens over the long haul. I'd really be interested in reading about the changes your body goes through in your journal and compare them with my experiences. I'm sure others would as well.
Just a thought.....
Lex
I completely agree with Lex. I have been zero carb (more or less with a bit of herb and seaweed for seasoning) for one month now. My skin, size, sleep and attitude have all improved. RVAF alone never did as much. I will never go back to eating plants except perhaps in isolated social settings ... maybe. I find that I have many many issues of reactions to plant foods (fruits included), now that I know what living without them is like. I don't even drink coffee and have almost booted tea completely out of my life. The less meddling - bombarding the system with all sorts of different stuff, the better. All fruit these days is NEOLITHIC as it has been bred to be bigger and sweeter. But no use trying to convince the powers that be here. There are no superfoods, there is only sustenance. Our brains grew bigger during the Paleolithic on animal foods, not bananas and coconuts.
This forum has gone to hell in a handbag. Until you can start discussing rpd - which does include zero carb diets, btw - I am afraid it will just deteriorate further.
-
First of all, it's perfectly legitimate to claim the theory "like cures like". In other words, if someone has a damaged liver due to some disease, then it's perfectly legitimate to suggest to that person that he should eat healthy, raw livers from grassfed/organic/wild etc. animals as it is reasonably logical to assume that the nutrients from such a healthy liver could be reused by the person in question to rebuild his own liver. So (pastured) raw pig guts would be good for someone with damaged guts of their own etc. Naturally, of course, any such suggestion would have to be accompanied by a suggestion to also eat other raw foods as well - just eating raw liver alone for weeks would not be enough to maintain overall health.
I think think you are correct that the theory of like-cures-like is probably something our paleo ancestors would have believed. Want a strong heart then eat the heart. Want to be more virile then eat gonads. Want to please the gods, sacrifice a virgin...etc... etc. Silly based on what we know today, but mostly harmless - except of course - if you're the virgin on the chopping block.
The key here is your last sentence. Eating liver alone would not maintain overall health. As paleo we'd most likely be consuming some liver as part of our diet anyway so it should be a mute point. It's the overall package of what we do, not the fact that we consumed some liver. My advice to someone asking would be to consume a wide variety of all parts of the animal as we have evidence that our ancestors did this. If you start to feel better then you've probably filled some of the nutritional gap from your previous diet.
Secondly, one of THE most common questions I've been faced with by RPDers is ":- I have multiple sclerosis/cancer etc., what foods do you recommend. Then, it is perfectly legitimate for me to point to concerns and studies linking grain-and-dairy consumption to multiple sclerosis, linking consumption of heat-created toxins to cancer via more studies etc. It is also legitimate for me to suggest a person eats raw liver if they have liver cancer, as mentioned above.
I agree with everything except the last sentence. The problems that paleo can help with are overall nutritional deficiencies and eating a WIDE VARIETY of paleo foods (whatever the person accepts these to be) is the proper approach rather than insisting that a specific food will cure a specific health issue. I do believe that it is proper to indicate that a 'wide variety' includes the organ meats like liver, kidney, spleen. heart, tongue, brain, etc as well as the more common muscle meats.
Also, people have asked me and others in the past how to cure a specific infection. Indeed, I seem to recall I did so in the early days. I'd have been most annoyed if I'd never gotten an answer due to overly rigid rules.
I'm not suggesting ridged rules other than to not make claims of specific foods curing specific conditions. We have no proof that most of these things have any value whatsoever, and we don't know the real condition of the person asking the question. My approach leans more towards giving the body the nutrients it needs to function properly and it will do the best it can to make its own repairs. Magic elixirs and herbal remedies just give people a false sense that they can continue poor behaviors, and then take a 'remedy' that will fix everything. We see this with GS who says that members of his family are facing some health challenges but won't eat paleo. He's attempting to solve the problems with magic herbs and wonder supplements. This is counter to everything that paleo is about.
I find it interesting that GS insists that high fruit intake is a good thing, yet his children are suffering tooth decay. Tooth decay has increased in the USA exponentially over the last few decades as concerned moms want to give their children those wonderful, healthful, vitamin filled, "organic" fruit juices that are just loaded with sugar. Many studies have been done that prove this cause and effect relationship.
As regards herbal medicine, most of herbal medicine has already been widely substantiated in terms of both millenia of folklore and recent scientific studies. About the only herb which hasn't has been echinacea, last I checked. I'll grant that most modern herbal supplements are useless being highly processed, but raw wild herbs such as dandelion and hundreds of others have proven uses, and even herbal teas, provided they aren't heated too much. If you doubt that, try taking any raw wild herb(in sizeable amounts), known to cause excessive urination(I think dandelion counts?) and see what happens!
I think that what as been substantiated is that many of the alkaloids that we have concentrated into pill form occur naturally in plants. I think the point should be that, given proper nutrition, our bodies don't need these alkaloids for health. All that most of these substances do is mask the symptoms but don't do anything at all to correct the underlying problem. I suppose that a tea made from crushed willow bark will help relieve a headache since it contains the active substance in aspirin, however, I've found that I no longer got the headaches when I ate a more paleo diet so the 'natural' plant alkaloids were no longer needed to cover up the symptoms of my previous poor dietary choices.
Re infertility:-Raw oysters have been widely reported by many RAFers in the past as benefitting their sperm-count/sexual activity(and not just RAFers) - I'm just one in a long line. So, again, it's perfectly OK, given that, to recommend raw oysters for infertility/sexual activity, provided it's not a 100% raw oyster-filled diet.
Most of us have found that libido increases dramatically on a raw paleo diet - including one without oysters. You may be correct that non RAFers feel that oysters help in this area, however, if they were eating proper foods in the first place, oysters would not be necessary. They wold just be another raw food in our paleo diet.
Re last paragraph or so:- This demonstrates a rather pro-zero-carb bias as being behind all the recent arguments, re the damning of fruit for hydration etc.. The fact is that most people in the world,define "palaeo" as a diet consisting of fruit, veg, meat and a rawpalaeo version would merely include raw versions of both. Now the ratios of raw plant-food within the Palaeolithic diet may be defined by a member as anywhere from 35% to 0%, but that is up to each forum member to decide.
I see no harm in mentioning alternative healing practices as long as they're put in the off-topic forum where they belong. I mean take the Alexander technique which teaches good posture - now good posture was a characteristic of palaeo times, as they had no chairs and wouldn't have needed any Alexander technique, but we live in an artificial world filled with beds and chairs etc. so may have need for alternative practices that mimic palaeo ways or whatever.
As I said in my previous post, my personal choice has been zero carb and therefore have made my personal bias very clear. I think this is as it should be - no hidden agendas. If you read carefully, you should also find that I indicated that including a bit of fruit on occasion is probably acceptable as well. In fact, when asked for a recommendation on how to transition to a paleo diet, I will recommend a small amount of fruit or even a small green salad be included. The key here being in the word "small", and my definition for this is ONE small to medium piece of whole fruit (or the equivalent, like a cup of cherries, or small bunch of grapes) or (not AND!) 1 to 2 cups of green salad as a snack per day. I think that most of us have found that grains, dairy, and most vegetables (especially vegetable juices) cause major problems. I'm also of a mind that consuming large amounts of modern sweet fruits (or their juices) year round is not the best choice. GS and his family consume large amounts of fruit and juice as part of their normal daily diet. They also seem to be reaping the expected results of this behavior in the form of tooth decay and less than optimal overall health. Magic herbs and supplements will not solve the underlying cause of these problems - you must stop the incorrrect behavior. I know, I spent 20 years of suffering with health issues and attempting to address them with "natural" remedies and can tell you first hand that it is a total waste of time.
Lex
-
GS and his family consume large amounts of fruit and juice as part of their normal daily diet.
I did fruitarian for 2 months Nov - Dec 2007.
Since getting into RPD via Wai Diet in Jan 2008 I've progressively lessened the ratio of fruit.
We don't juice vegetables (yuck) - my brother borrowed my juicer and never returned it.
Our idea of "juice" is half a lemon / 5 calamansi in a glass of water.
It's 2009 and I've been on the High Fat - Low carb variant of RPD since Jan 2009.
...Learning from Aajonus' books and the RPD community (all you guys here)
My breakfast these days could be a slice or 2 of papaya, or indian mango or guava + a raw duck egg or two.
Lunch is raw animal food and Dinner is raw animal food ... trying to gain weight and muscle.
(Or just one meal of raw animal food if I pig out in a meal).
-
there seems to be way too much discussion about rules on this forum. Why so eager to restrict the little activity that's going on anyway?
I agree with Tyler on specific foods for helping with specific diseases. Eating simple raw paleo will help the body maintain homeostatic balance but if the body is way out of balance (diseased) it often needs a "push", as in specific foods, to push it back in balance. This will often speed healing and is often necessary to heal at all.
Raw zero carb on domesticated, vaccuum-packed, vacuum-aged beef is no more true paleo than is including some plant material. some of the beef in supermarkets has been in vacuum bags for months before presented and bought by a consumer and by that time contains plenty of Amines . beef that has been vacuum packed remains nice and pink in color, looking very fresh.
and when did this board become a zero carb one? Isn't that what the zerocarbage board is for?
-
GS, this appears far different than your previous statements that you eat fruit and consume fruit juices for "hydration" in place of water. It is also counter to your previous post where you put some poor person on a "natural" fruit juice and vegetable juice diet to cure liver cancer.
Please understand that I'm not criticizing your personal choices or your right to make them. Only that the choices and recommendations you've made are not consistent with the topic of this forum.
I'm also in a similar situation as you've described where I follow an admittedly narrow interpretation of a raw paleo diet, but my family does not. As an example, my wife is 5 feet tall and weighs about 220 lbs - border line on being grossly obese. She suffers from high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, and gall stones to the extent that even though she's had her gall bladder removed, her bile ducts get clogged and she must be hospitalized every couple of years to have them manually swept out. All of these things cause her great discomfort, headaches, severe indigestion, constant heart burn, sleep apnea, etc, yet she refuses to change her diet. Her doctor says that her diet is so bad, (gallons of vegetable oils, cookies and cakes drenched in honey, and mostly pasta, rice, and white bread), that even eating hamburgers and french fries would be and improvement. She insists that the foods she eats are what her culture has eaten for centuries and refuses to change. Her sisters and brother also suffer similar problems as they eat the same foods.
My wife also insists that the food I eat is totally wrong and she wouldn't eat raw meat or animal fat if it was the last food on earth, she'd rather die of starvation. She sticks with this even though she's seen that the way I eat has solved my health issues, many of which were the same as hers. The choices my wife makes are hers and she must endure the consequences just as I must face the consequences of the choices I make. When she complains of her morning headache, her heartburn and stomach pain after eating, the fact that she can't sleep and is always tired, and the intense pain when her bile ducts become blocked, I never say a word. She just takes her daily fist full of pills and we head for the emergency room every few months because this is the way she wants to live her life.
Our choices are our own and we have every right to make them, but must endure the resulting consequences, good or bad. My problem is when we are recommending "medication" to solve health problems. Like it or not, herbal remedies are nothing more than "medication in the wild" as it were. As Tyler pointed out, plants contain the same substances as the pills - it just looks different and you may have to consume a bit more of the plant or extract the chemicals as a tea etc. To pretend that this is somehow better or different than taking a modern medicine containing the same substances seem a bit disingenuous to me. What I'm trying to do is work through my health issues such that my lifestyle itself will make the need for medications in any form unnecessary. So far my narrow definition of what constitutes a good paleo diet has served me will in this respect.
Lex
-
there seems to be way too much discussion about rules on this forum. Why so eager to restrict the little activity that's going on anyway?
I really don't see this as a discussion about any rules other than to discuss each topic within the context of being paleo. In the current case GS started a legitimate thread asking for comments on specific animal foods having specific curative powers. What has resulted is a spirited discussion on whether prescribing specific foods to cure a specific illness is appropriate in the context of what living a paleo lifestyle is all about. I've made it clear what side I'm on, but the wonderful thing about an open discussion, and what makes it different from a blog, is that you have the right to give your opinion as well. The other cool thing is that everyone can read the arguments from both sides and make their own decisons.
and when did this board become a zero carb one? Isn't that what the zerocarbage board is for?
I don't believe that anyone has suggested that this forum become focused on zero carb. If you will read my posts I've made it clear that this is my personal choice and I've found it effective. I've also stated that when asked, I always recommed a more moderate approach that includes a "small" amount of fruit or salad each day. Again, this is a discussion and anyone may state their opinion on this subject and let the reader evaluate the arguements and evidence themselves. If, over time, they choose to try zero carb as Satya has, then that's fine. If they choose instead to add more fruits and veggies, then that is fine too. The best service we can provide is to argue our positions as persuasively as possible so that readers have the benefit of all sides of the issue.
I also welcome criticizim and discussion that points out where my reasoning is flawed or my behavior is inconsistent with my stated values. I do this to others and mean no disrespect to them personally, only that I feel their opinions are in error, and I try to provide objective evidence as to why I feel this way. I'm glad to get the same treatment and seldom take offense.
Lex
-
GS, this appears far different than your previous statements that you eat fruit and consume fruit juices for "hydration" in place of water. It is also counter to your previous post where you put some poor person on a "natural" fruit juice and vegetable juice diet to cure liver cancer.
The other fruit juice I'm talking about are coconuts. I don't drink pure water, I do drink water + 1/2 lemon or 5 calamansi when we don't have coconuts.
Coconut water only has a slight hint of light sweetness in it. Today we have watermelon at breakfast - ultra hydrating stuff.
It is the liver cancer patient who needs extra carbs because of his malfunctioning liver: needs his watermelon or melon juice as needed and can be observed by his wife and his water is 1 orange in 1 glass of water. Understand that this guy is on the definition of Raw Paleo Diet: raw fruits, raw meat, raw veggies (juiced kamote leaves). His proportions are different because of his current condition. He was too weak on low carb... his energy levels improved when his wife added the watermelon and melon juice. His pain disappeared when they stopped feeding him at night. The liver cancer guy's needs are different. I already passed them off to a professional healer who attended to him daily, but they ran out of money for that kind of care. So I just coach them over the phone and visit them when I have the time. The smelly toxic gunk from his liver is being pooped out daily since I took over his coaching, no need for manipulative coffee enemas. He's making great progress in the declogging and detoxing of his liver. Of course this paragraph is about healing a person, not my diet.
I probably have to make a personal journal thread for my paleo life. This is getting so off-topic.
-
and when did this board become a zero carb one? Isn't that what the zerocarbage board is for?
There is a board on this forum for zero carb. It happens to be more popular than the omnivorous rpd board here. Tyler himself has admitted that the vast majority of rpd followers shun plant foods. It's just the way it is. I was very resistant to zc, now I have seen the light. But yeah, the zero carb forum is way more lively.
http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com
-
Case in point. On the other forum, someone asked about sunburn and aloe vera was mentioned by 1 person and I agreed, having had success with it, myself. So, I don't see how herbal medicine can simply be left out as it's such a palaeo characteristic.
I spent years in the harsh Western Australian sun getting sunburnt when all I ate was SAD and found aloe vera cooled the sunburn down for a few seconds but did nothing really but leave a gummy mess on my face. I find I don't get burnt on RPD and if I did I would use melted animal fat.
A study showed aloe vera to have no benefits on sunburn or wounds anyway so your wasting your time and still overstating the benefits of using herbs in treating what are neolithic health conditions.
Poor posture is caused by our ancestors and our present poor diets not by ergonomically incorrect chairs! The Alexander technique treats a neolithic condition and while it may be slight helpful it's no where near as helpfull as a mother and father eating RPD before and during pregnancy or feeding a child raw paleo foods.
GS I did find my tooth healed but it was on zero carb and after some time. My experience with 'sugar bombs' on RPD is my face goes burning hot and I start to itch under my chin. I never have any problems on red fatty meat. That is part my bias for zero carb or VLC eating and the other being I took great interest in 'bush tucker' years ago and I bought the plant identification books and spent a lot of time in the bush and there's nothing out there excepty pithy acrid tasting 'fruits' and it often depended on rainfall or was wrong time of year.
-
The other fruit juice I'm talking about are coconuts. I don't drink pure water, I do drink water + 1/2 lemon or 5 calamansi when we don't have coconuts.
Coconut water only has a slight hint of light sweetness in it. Today we have watermelon at breakfast - ultra hydrating stuff.
It is the liver cancer patient who needs extra carbs because of his malfunctioning liver: needs his watermelon or melon juice as needed and can be observed by his and his water is 1 orange in 1 glass of water. Understand that this guy is on the definition of Raw Paleo Diet: raw fruits, raw meat, raw veggies (juiced kamote leaves). His proportions are different because of his current condition. He was too weak on low carb... his energy levels improved when his wife added the watermelon and melon juice. His pain disappeared when they stopped feeding him at night. The liver cancer guy's needs are different. I already passed them off to a professional healer who attended to him daily, but they ran out of money for that kind of care. So I just coach them over the phone and visit them when I have the time. The smelly toxic gunk from his liver is being pooped out daily since I took over his coaching, no need for manipulative coffee enemas. He's making great progress in the declogging and detoxing of his liver. Of course this paragraph is about healing a person, not my diet.
I probably have to make a personal journal thread for my paleo life. This is getting so off-topic.
Water is also ultra hydrating stuff and was around in paleo times unlike neolithic watermelons.
-
Regarding sunburn, also being from Australia I spent every weekend getting burnt red raw growing up. My skin already has some significant sun damage but rubbing raw meat/fat (not melted fat, or oils) has helped it. After seeing the improvement in my skin from rubbing raw meat on it, I have a theory that if you eat nothing but raw meat then not brushing your teeth could really help gum health from the raw meat getting on the gums!
-
Water is also ultra hydrating stuff and was around in paleo times unlike neolithic watermelons.
Well, when I was doing my raw, zero-carb trials, water(even the best quality mineral water) didn't hydrate me at all, no matter how much I drank of it. I even resorted to salted water, in desperation - no luck. In the end, fruit did the trick. So, water isn't always the solution, though most of the time.
-
A study showed aloe vera to have no benefits on sunburn or wounds anyway so your wasting your time and still overstating the benefits of using herbs in treating what are neolithic health conditions.
1 study doesn't prove anything. And besides, like I pointed out ages ago, most mderon pills are derived from healthier herbs(eg:- aspirin from white willow bark etc.), so there's ample evidence to support herbal medicine.
Poor posture is caused by our ancestors and our present poor diets not by ergonomically incorrect chairs! The Alexander technique treats a neolithic condition and while it may be slight helpful it's no where near as helpfull as a mother and father eating RPD before and during pregnancy or feeding a child raw paleo foods.
"poor posture is caused by our ancestors!" That's just absurd! There's no genetic link to poor posture as it can be vastly improved if one changes one's lifestyle, it's due to neolithic behaviour re sitting in chairs, lying on beds etc. And a RAF diet did nothing to improve my posture, on its own. That required exercise, among other things.
[/quote]
-
Thanks for the tooth decay tips guys.
I'm not the one with the tooth decay, it's my 7 year old who has tooth decay.
I wonder if I can get him to go very low carb...
-
There is a board on this forum for zero carb. It happens to be more popular than the omnivorous rpd board here. Tyler himself has admitted that the vast majority of rpd followers shun plant foods. It's just the way it is. I was very resistant to zc, now I have seen the light. But yeah, the zero carb forum is way more lively.
http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com
The only reason why it's more popular is because it focuses on a cooked diet. Few people are willing to try out a raw diet consisting of raw meat unless they've already exhausted all other possibilities.
And, I should make absolutely clear that I do not claim that the vast majority of RPDers shun raw plant foods. Rubbish. They may have a low plant-food component(usually 5-35%), but most RPDers are certainly not raw, zero-carb, by any means. Quite the contrary.
-
I think think you are correct that the theory of like-cures-like is probably something our paleo ancestors would have believed. Want a strong heart then eat the heart. Want to be more virile then eat gonads. Want to please the gods, sacrifice a virgin...etc... etc. Silly based on what we know today, but mostly harmless - except of course - if you're the virgin on the chopping block.
I'm not basing this on palaeo beliefs but simple logic and common sense. The nutrients within a healthy cow liver help the liver of a human as well, by implication. To suggest otherwise is to claim that cows and humans have such widely different body-chemistry that they originate from different planets. An unlikely possibility.
The key here is your last sentence. Eating liver alone would not maintain overall health. As paleo we'd most likely be consuming some liver as part of our diet anyway so it should be a mute point. It's the overall package of what we do, not the fact that we consumed some liver. My advice to someone asking would be to consume a wide variety of all parts of the animal as we have evidence that our ancestors did this. If you start to feel better then you've probably filled some of the nutritional gap from your previous diet.
Yet, in very recently, you claimed that raw organ-meats were supposedly not necessary. Sudden change of tune, there.
I think that what as been substantiated is that many of the alkaloids that we have concentrated into pill form occur naturally in plants. I think the point should be that, given proper nutrition, our bodies don't need these alkaloids for health. All that most of these substances do is mask the symptoms but don't do anything at all to correct the underlying problem. I suppose that a tea made from crushed willow bark will help relieve a headache since it contains the active substance in aspirin, however, I've found that I no longer got the headaches when I ate a more paleo diet so the 'natural' plant alkaloids were no longer needed to cover up the symptoms of my previous poor dietary choices.
There is an important , really major flaw with this notion, namely, that carnivores in the wild routinely use herbal medicine(raw herbs) to cure their various ills, it's not just a herbivore/omnivore thing -self-medication by animals is a known fact. So, that makes it clear that diet alone cannot possibly achieve 100% health. Exercise, herbs etc. all can play a part.
Most of us have found that libido increases dramatically on a raw paleo diet - including one without oysters. You may be correct that non RAFers feel that oysters help in this area, however, if they were eating proper foods in the first place, oysters would not be necessary. They wold just be another raw food in our paleo diet.
I wasn't referring only to non-RAFers but to RAFers as well. Plenty of RAFers have mentioned increased sex-drive as a result of eating raw oysters, and have mentioned a much stronger. more noticeable effect from raw oysters than with other raw foods.
-
What really concerns me is this whole fundamentalist approach. Most RAFers come to a raw version of the Palaeolithic diet while doing some other raw diet(eg:- raw vegan with a little raw meat or, far more commonly, they are Primal Dieters or weston-price-dieters). Now, if we start banning free discussion by people on issues some of us don't imagine are "palaeo", then we'll have to ban anyone who even vaguely mentions raw dairy consumption etc,. and, may I remind you, that Primal Dieters far outnumber RPDers, so we'd be discouraging many future potential RPD converts. Similiarly, lambasting people for eating lots of raw organic fruit is hardly kosher. After all, even in Palaeo times, it's logical to assume that palaeo peoples in more southerly climes had more access to raw plant-food and made use of it - to suggest otherwise, would be to assume that Palaeo peoples were devoted zero-carbers long before the concept ever existed, rather than just opportunistic hunters who would simply go after any reasonable food, in order to avoid starvation.
Whatever the case, if we are going to insist on a more fundamentalist approach re raw wild herbs, then any condemnation of raw-fruit-consumption should be banned automatically as well, for reasons of balance, as raw fruit is most definitely "Palaeo"(much like raw herbs are, but anyway). In short, this is all just a bit silly. One of the saving graces of this forum, at the start, was Craig's very loose approach and high level of tolerance, and we should be following that in spirit.
-
From my perspective on this forum, and I read every thread, it seems like the biggest problem the "strict raw paleo faction" has is that when people ask questions often GS will post information that can be seen as not raw paleo and a link to one of his websites which can also be seen as not raw paleo. The implication being that the first order of defense (or offense if you like to think of it that way) against illness or to improve and defend health is not simply to eat raw paleo but to use a contrived method of diet and cleanses to clear up health problems and then as maintenance eat raw paleo.
I think the problem might be as simple as about half the active members came to the diet from raw vegan while the other half came from cooked paleo. I sort of came from both, although I attempted raw vegan for much longer and never really went a long stretch trying cooked paleo, I more went into a pseudo Primal diet than removed dairy and green juice to arrive at raw paleo. Either way I think this forum has offered a good place for both types of raw paleo eater to post their experiences and knowledge.
-
The only reason why it's more popular is because it focuses on a cooked diet. Few people are willing to try out a raw diet consisting of raw meat unless they've already exhausted all other possibilities.
Quite a few eat raw on the more lively forum. Some, like me, are mixed raw and cooked. But then, I do not seek out any diet to cure me of anything. I am feeling better now than I ever have - especially the last 2 days without any tea.
The forum was much better under Craig, and the rawpaleodiet.com site was much better under me.
-
What really concerns me is this whole fundamentalist approach.
What concerns me is this whole fruitarian bend and Bible thumping nonsense that is posted in general discussion boards. Maybe someone can come up with a loose definition of what paleo is and isn't. I don't think it's a majority fruit diet in the first place. It is a majority animal foods diet. I also don't think it concerns the Judeo-Christian texts. So talk of floods and sperm counts (as Nicola brought up) just really makes this place surreal lately, imho.
And speaking of fundamentalist: Isn't 100% raw pretty extreme too?
-
I thought we were supposed to be supporting each other, isn't that what this forum is about? Who cares what is the most extreme. Zero Carb or Raw are both very radical compared to "average" but I don't think the members of this board are looking for "average" health (or to return to their previous health problems).
Besides I thought this was a RAW paleo forum, with the focus on RAW, since "paleo" is tough to define exactly, and even tougher to sustain (a "true" paleo diet would consist of nothing but wild, non-domesticated foods)
-
Yes, of course. The focus is and should be raw. But it should be noted that a raw plant-based diet is not paleo. So it must be both raw and paleo. And yes, let's get on with the fun and support. I am all for it. Why don't you post a picture or recipe or something?
-
"the zero carb forum is way more lively"
http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com
what i've found in that forum is a focus on:
~ cooked meat strategies
~ weight loss strategies
of course, since 99.9% of the planet's population resonates w/ the 2 issues it's easy for that forum to have become more lively than this
if charles would allow a raw meat section in his forum (without scaring people w/ microorganisms = evil type of concoctions) it might perhaps become more interesting for some people
or perhaps some kind of collaboration between the 2 forums would expand the horizons of both crowds...
now re. this raw paleo forum, if due to social pressure or other perceived external forces some1 feels like claiming they do not eat fruit but next time they post we learn they just had watermelon, then it'd seem that lex is right in expecting that kind of revelations to go into the personal journals section rather than in "hot topics" -- incidentally, up to now i had never heard before that eating python or crocodile body parts was a hot topic... you never stop learning new tricks... such as the hotness of cold blooded animals
rather, i'd love to see a discussion of "rabbit starvation" & the fat:protein = 80:20 ratio -- personal experiences, research findings, urban legends...
that would be really useful i tend to think
-
I pinched this quote from the zerocarb forum just for you to consider
Studies of wild animal populations since the 1950's has revealed a continuous increase in the rate of cancer. Given that these wild animal populations are in their natural environments, eating their natural diets, the most obvious culprit in the increasing rate of cancer is environmental toxins, including pesticides.
Nicola
-
What concerns me is this whole fruitarian bend and Bible thumping nonsense that is posted in general discussion boards.
Where's the fruitarian bend? I don't see it. Where is it?
In the barefoot says humans are fruitarian thread? Which we all debunked?
Anne the fruitarian vs Scott the primal dieter video? Hands down Scott is the healthy human!
Bible thumping? Me? The comparative flood mythology? The integration of worldwide mythologies with the electric universe? Hey, this is cutting edge science. Including and accepting catastrophic times in history and pre-history based on evidence is a marked valid improvement over uniformitarian darwinian slow evolution hypothesis. Evolution still happens, but on a noted faster pace during catastrophes. Check out www.thunderbolts.info all evidence based, laboratory replicatable plasma science and comparative mythology. This is science vs science in lively debates.
The significance of why I post the www.thunderbolts.info videos and information on floods and catastrophes is that I want to investigate and home in closer to what paleolithic conditions truly were. And it appears that assuming today's 365 day calendar, single sun, planets far apart, night and day conditions, dry air, big swaths of oceans, 4 seasons per year, are not what our paleolithic ancestors may have experienced before the worldwide floods.
Isn't the exploration of what may have been paleolithic conditions truly may have been like very interesting?
Seems the darwin uniformitarian slow evolution may be wrong about assuming the same earth conditions for millions of years and us humans evolving from life beginning within the oceans, then we should find sea food more compatible... but instead most of us... me included find raw beef to be most health giving. Then the pre-flood earth may indeed have had more land than oceans and more beef like animals that sustained human life in the low carb / high fat manner.
Investigating www.thunderbolts.info seems to be reasonably valid and touches and changes all the sciences and theories held so dearly... true scientific inquiry holds no sacred cows (darwinian slow evolution is not a sacred cow)... and should be open to new investigations all the time... including our presumptions of what paleolithic earth conditions were.
I would never ever bible thump as I've always been 100% atheist and curiously scientific.
-
But GS, #1, I did not address my post to you. #2, the catastrophic crap is so unbelievably unbelievable that anyone with any science background can see it's bunk. Same with Tyler lately, I just can't respond to these reports of herbs being in modern primates therefore we all were herbalists in the past. If the logic is lacking, then I can't make reason understood by using it. It is absolutely pointless to comment here now!
Finally, the reason why I am so turned off by this forum now is this comment you made to Elainie, which probably scared her off for good.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/welcoming-commitee/hi-there/msg9619/#msg9619
"It's 1:30am.
An idea popped in my mind and I just had to type this so I can get back to sleep.
After your fifth child, did you get a ligation / have your tubes tied?
Did you get into any kind of contraception?
Did you get into any maintenance drugs or shots?"
You should delete my account now. (I had big problems doing it in the past, as it does not happen in any reasonable time). Thank you. And may the force be with you.
-
"poor posture is caused by our ancestors!" That's just absurd! There's no genetic link to poor posture as it can be vastly improved if one changes one's lifestyle, it's due to neolithic behaviour re sitting in chairs, lying on beds etc. And a RAF diet did nothing to improve my posture, on its own. That required exercise, among other things.
I disagree and you misquoted me for starters.
'Poor posture is caused by our ANCESTORS and OUR present POOR DIETS not by ergonomically incorrect chairs! '
So I blamed it on our ancestors and parents poor diets every time a baby is conceived it's not a clean slate. Look at pottengers cats. There's numerous studies which show what your ancestors ate affects your DNA.
Price showed poor diet caused flat feet, bowed legs as well as poor facial development including narrow palet, under developed maxilla, lower jaw underdevelopment, he also mentioned poor pelvic development from what I remember. I think what your ancestors ate (which includes your parents) not only affects your posture but your nervous system and immune system too.
Check out 'adaptive capacity' in this Weston Price article. http://nourishedmagazine.com.au/blog/articles/is-it-mental-or-is-it-dental-cranial-dental-impacts-on-total-health (http://nourishedmagazine.com.au/blog/articles/is-it-mental-or-is-it-dental-cranial-dental-impacts-on-total-health)
(http://www.westonaprice.org/images/mental_weakchin1.jpg)(http://www.westonaprice.org/images/mental_weakchin2.jpg)
So poor facial cranial development/mouth breathing leads people to have that stooped head in front of the body posture, no amount of Alexander technique is going to correct that.
Poor posture has nothing to do with how you sit in a chair.If you want your child to have good posture eat healthy during preconception and for the nine months after and throw out Alexander technique books.
-
But GS, #1, I did not address my post to you. #2, the catastrophic crap is so unbelievably unbelievable that anyone with any science background can see it's bunk. Same with Tyler lately, I just can't respond to these reports of herbs being in modern primates therefore we all were herbalists in the past. If the logic is lacking, then I can't make reason understood by using it. It is absolutely pointless to comment here now!
Finally, the reason why I am so turned off by this forum now is this comment you made to Elainie, which probably scared her off for good.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/welcoming-commitee/hi-there/msg9619/#msg9619
"It's 1:30am.
An idea popped in my mind and I just had to type this so I can get back to sleep.
After your fifth child, did you get a ligation / have your tubes tied?
Did you get into any kind of contraception?
Did you get into any maintenance drugs or shots?"
You should delete my account now. (I had big problems doing it in the past, as it does not happen in any reasonable time). Thank you. And may the force be with you.
Satya, these are kind of questions that I doctor would ask a patient. That's what we do here help people. It maybe a cultural thing to be so specific and I would of not been so specific but thats my culture. I don't see the problem.
Charles talks about tits and arses, now that can annoying.
-
I'm not basing this on palaeo beliefs but simple logic and common sense. The nutrients within a healthy cow liver help the liver of a human as well, by implication. To suggest otherwise is to claim that cows and humans have such widely different body-chemistry that they originate from different planets. An unlikely possibility.
Not sure I follow your reason, logic, or common sense. If it was required to eat like to properly nourish like then cows couldn't exist at all because they eat grass. As far as I know grass doesn't have a liver, heart, spleen, or anyother organ like a cow. The argument that like nourishes or cures like is simplistic nonsense. You are correct that many ancient (and some modern) cultures believe this stuff, but it doesn't make it true. What is does do is line the pockets of charlatans peddling this stuff to the uneducated.
Yet, in very recently, you claimed that raw organ-meats were supposedly not necessary. Sudden change of tune, there.
No change in tune. My statement was that I was no longer totally convinced that organ meats are necessary. I still eat them in the form of my pet food mixture, but my observation has been that many who are doing zero carb are doing quite well on muscle meats alone. I also know that people have survived for long periods on pemmican as their only food with no organ meats at all, and have seemingly maintained perfect health. This sort of puts me in the position of the dying gangster who doesn't believe in God, calling in the priest for Last Rights just in case - soooo, I continue eating my small bit of organ meats, just in case. But I'm also willing to point out that there is a good bit of evidence that my previous reasoning on the need for organ meats may be pure folly.
There is an important , really major flaw with this notion, namely, that carnivores in the wild routinely use herbal medicine(raw herbs) to cure their various ills, it's not just a herbivore/omnivore thing -self-medication by animals is a known fact. So, that makes it clear that diet alone cannot possibly achieve 100% health. Exercise, herbs etc. all can play a part.
I have little experience or real knowledge in this area so must defer to others. My only actual experience in animal self medication that I can think of is that my cat chews grass when she gets fur balls and this makes her vomit the mess (including the bit of grass she ate) all over the rug. If this qualifies for animal self medication then I must admit that my cat 'medicates' herself with grass. I haven't had a fur ball lately and when I drank wheatgrass juice or vegetable juices it just made me nauseous, dizzy, and gave me loose smelly stools. I decided to stop self-medicating based on this experience. I've felt much better ever since.
I wasn't referring only to non-RAFers but to RAFers as well. Plenty of RAFers have mentioned increased sex-drive as a result of eating raw oysters, and have mentioned a much stronger. more noticeable effect from raw oysters than with other raw foods.
I only pointed out that a diet of raw animal foods of all types seem to increase libido in everyone who tries it. I haven't personally noticed raw oysters doing much more for me than a diet of raw red meat and fat - but that is my experience, YMMV.
Lex
-
I pinched this quote from the zerocarb forum just for you to consider
Studies of wild animal populations since the 1950's has revealed a continuous increase in the rate of cancer. Given that these wild animal populations are in their natural environments, eating their natural diets, the most obvious culprit in the increasing rate of cancer is environmental toxins, including pesticides.
Nicola
Absolutely interesting. :o
Can you reply with the URL found on zerocarb forum regarding this quote?
I'd like to follow up on this and try to find the culprits.
-
What really concerns me is this whole fundamentalist approach. Most RAFers come to a raw version of the Palaeolithic diet while doing some other raw diet(eg:- raw vegan with a little raw meat or, far more commonly, they are Primal Dieters or weston-price-dieters). Now, if we start banning free discussion by people on issues some of us don't imagine are "palaeo", then we'll have to ban anyone who even vaguely mentions raw dairy consumption etc,. and, may I remind you, that Primal Dieters far outnumber RPDers, so we'd be discouraging many future potential RPD converts.
No one is suggesting that we "ban" discussion of these topics, just that they be addressed and argued in context of the topic of this forum which is RAW PALEO. GS started this thread which I feel is a valid topic to discuss. I'm sure the discussion is not going exactly as he intended. I expect he wanted support for prescribing animal parts as "medicine" to cure illness. I don't think that is the proper context. Instead I challenged the very concept of using specific plants or animal parts as "treatments" or "cures" being appropriate to the concept of a paleo lifestyle, and a lively debate has been the result. I'm finding the arguments on both sides interesting and thought provoking.
BTW, thanks for bringing up my apparent waffling on the need for organ meats. My guess is others may have misunderstood my initial comments. Your challenge helped me clarify my own thinking and address the issue in a little more detail.
Lex
-
Absolutely interesting. :o
Can you reply with the URL found on zerocarb forum regarding this quote?
I'd like to follow up on this and try to find the culprits.
Post 112
http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com/showthread.php?tid=1652&page=12
-
Sorry, it was badly worded, I'd thought you'd implied that natural selection in palaeo times was responsible for posture.
The trouble with your claims is that people have vastly improved their posture by following good habits such as the alexander technique etc., while still doing crappy, processed diets, so clearly a good diet cannot be an explanation for that. I am most certainly not a weston-price convert, by any means, and much of his claims re supposed links between criminality/homosexuality and genes/diet etc. have been proven to be absolute bunk.
What really worries is me is what someone once told me years ago, that claiming that diet was the sole answer to health was the first sign of dietary fundamentalism. That's why I was so leery of Aajonus's claims that one didn't need exercise or anything else, one just had to stuff oneself with raw animal food etc.(of limited variety) and everything would be fine.
Another aspect is that limiting discussion solely to diet greatly limits us as a forum. The vast majority of us, I suspect, aren't obsessed with diets, raw or otherwise, 24 hours a day. We all have separate lives , full of interesting stuff unrelated to diet. So, IMO, we have an off-topic forum, a hot topics forum etc. It's just boring to discuss only raw diets 100% of the time.
And given that there's still great controversy about what actually is Palaeo, it's absurd for anyone to choose for us all what Palaeo means. It's hubris, in fact.
Re satya herbal medicine- You clearly didn't read my posts. I'd actually pointed out, that not only our immediate primate cousins, but all animals routinely practise herbal medicine, even carnivores. Something that endemic and so much a part of animals' lives can hardly be said to have suddenly appeared(and only in man and modern animals!) within the last few thousand years.
-
"I want to investigate and home in closer to what paleolithic conditions truly were. And it appears that assuming today's 365 day calendar, single sun, planets far apart, night and day conditions, dry air, big swaths of oceans, 4 seasons per year, are not what our paleolithic ancestors may have experienced before the worldwide floods"
~ if i remember correctly, the last ice age is said to have happened some 70,000-10,000 years before present > 1 huge, or many, flood(s) must have ensued
~ the cro-magnon, the authors of human-cum-animal cave paintings, were up & running roughly in the 2nd half of that last glaciation period
~ archeological records of rice cultivation (a flood crop, if you look at it) are at least as old as 8,000 bce -- neolithic agriculture
in sum:
any biblical or otherwise recent flood (i.e. after 8,000 bce) is not paleo but neolithic
now
the # of sun(s) or seasons, etc. during the various stages of the paleolithic, or even earlier on since the beginning of the biosphere on this planet, are part of a separate theoretical approach, which is to be studied, accepted, rejected, or left in a limbo for the time being
-
"Seems the darwin uniformitarian slow evolution may be wrong about assuming the same earth conditions for millions of years and us humans evolving from life beginning within the oceans, then we should find sea food more compatible... but instead most of us... me included find raw beef to be most health giving. Then the pre-flood earth may indeed have had more land than oceans and more beef like animals that sustained human life in the low carb / high fat manner"
i'm not sure about your premise, haven't studied this yet
but what you say about beef reminds me that in the cave paintings most of the animals depicted, other than felines & bears, are large or medium quadrupeds: horse, mammoth, bison, ox, ibex, stag...
birds & fish are only few & far between
maybe there is an optimal ratio in the kind of animals they ate?
{personally, i don't eat fish mostly because even if i find it right off the boat it isn't totally satisfying by itself (as quadruped meat is); i do take good quality fish oil on a regular basis, though, for its large-chain pufa's & oily vitamins}
-
The argument that like nourishes or cures like is simplistic nonsense. You are correct that many ancient (and some modern) cultures believe this stuff, but it doesn't make it true. What is does do is line the pockets of charlatans peddling this stuff to the uneducated.
How can you say that eating like foods absolutely DOES NOT help? Perhaps there may be SOME validity to the idea that eating liver could help heal a poorly functioning liver, or help it heal faster. Do you have specific research which disproves this notion? And why so resistant to the idea that oysters can increase arousal or sperm count; or for that matter, the many other possibilities regarding food and herbs? Just b/c a food does or does not affect you in a particular way, does not mean that holds for everyone else on the planet. No one doubts that solid nutrition (RAF) is the underpinning of health, but many of us are interested in how food and herbs can be used for healing, and for affecting the mind/body in various ways. Two perfect examples: honey helps wounds to heal much faster; and coconut water can be used as intravenous fluid. We have known this since WWII (longer really). But from the way you respond, I would suspect you are 'against' these hocus pocus, snake-oil remedies lining the pockets of charlatans - your [apparent] bitterness towards, whoever, would keep you from considering the possibilities or the research - even if that research is somewhat flawed or sometimes marred by those trying to make a quick buck.
'Poor posture is caused by our ANCESTORS and OUR present POOR DIETS not by ergonomically incorrect chairs! '
Sitting in chairs all the time and lack of motion in general, causes your muscles,joints, and connective tissues to stiffen and atrophy, resulting in weakness and dysfunction of movement and displacement of bones which manifests itself as pain in the body. Furthermore, injuries sometimes need healing.
I have used stretching/exercise techniques specifically designed to reduce this dysfunction to CURE lower back pain after a 20 foot fall, CURE a neck/upper back injury after landing basically on my head(separate incident), CURE my girlfriend’s chronic headaches (like 3 per week), I could go on. The changes were drastic, quick, and long lasting (check out "Egoscue Method of Health Through Motion" if you're interested). Although I do concede to you, there is no doubt a genetic and dietary component that plays a major role in bone development and joint health as well (I often wonder how different I would be if I was RP from conception),
but the more general point I'd like to make is -
for a forum where we’re supposed to be open to discussion and possibilities I hear some very close minded and absolutist kind of statements about some topics that - at the VERY least - MAY be beneficial regarding various aspects of health. It's almost like the dogmatism that often accompanies veganism/vegetarianism has infected our RP forum. I started eating raw animal foods as an open minded experiment to see if and how it works - and I wasn't in [apparent] poor health, didn't come from raw vegan, or vegetarianism, or even cooked paleo - just came across it randomly one day and thought it made sense. And I'm very interested in the ideas of other open minded individuals (hell, even close minded sometimes), and very interested in results of their experiences and experiments.
Truth is, while this is a RP forum, it is more generally a health forum. And I'd like to be able to discuss ideas of health, wellness, nutrition, exercise, and yes, alternative medicine under the umbrella of a raw animal food diet. This should be a medium for comfortable exchange of ideas, even if sometimes those ideas are wacky. Let's be a little more tolerant, perhaps more open, at least less ridiculing.
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” - Albert Einstein
-
It's not about censorship, it's about keeping focus on the main boards. Tyler did not even want Lex's pemmican manual in the recipes section, which is fine. I put a bone stock blurb in the WAPF board, since it is not raw. And I did ask permission about it. It is this sort of thing. Liver flushes may help someone as much as a bone stock, but it's not really on topic for the forum. I used to be a moderator on this forum from its inception, which I gave up by my own volition several months ago. I can comment on the changes to it from experience.
Andrew, you are correct that these are pretty basic questions, but they are pretty darn personal! She never sought after these inquiries, and perhaps it is coincidental, but she stopped posting shortly after this. I am pretty open, but my contraception or lack thereof is pretty out of line on a public forum unless I ask about it, don't you think? It's like me saying, "Oh, I just woke up and can't get back to sleep until you tell me how often you ejaculate a week."
-
i had to laugh Satya!
I don't think that girl was a stayer anyway.
Guitarman using words like seems/could/possibly/may makes for some really boring discussion don't you think?
-
Guitarman using words like seems/could/possibly/may makes for some really boring discussion don't you think?
Guitarman's response is valid and many people think the way he does. I thought this way in my younger days as I fell for the 'pitch of the week' from the diet and health Charlatans. Of course many things may/could/possibly be, but there is precious little in the way of unbiased facts or research to support these views. I prefer things that are supported by data that is statistically better than that of random chance or the placebo effect. For me, this rules out the may's, could's, and possibly's.
I've stated my case, and others, including Guitarman, have stated theirs. This is exactly what we should all want. It is up to the readers to make their own decisions based on the arguments and information presented.
Lex
-
{the best overview complete w/ book icons = the last: endes gut, alles gut}
see a basic glossary at:
http://www.cna.org/isaac/Glossb.htm (http://www.cna.org/isaac/Glossb.htm)
on newtonian/linear dynamics:
the geometrical representation of a linear equation = a chart w/ 2 coordinates (x & y) in which all points form a line
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamical_system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamical_system)
the following is from
http://www.chaos.cornell.edu/ (http://www.chaos.cornell.edu/)
"The subject of nonlinear systems is wonderfully broad and has important applications in fields ranging from physics, mechanical engineering and computer science to the life sciences, sociology and finance. A mathematics student studying dynamical systems, a physiologist studying the heart and a computer scientist studying the internet are all studying nonlinear phenomena. Yet, they are unlikely to cross paths in traditional graduate programs. In contrast, the Nonlinear Systems Program brings together doctoral candidates enrolled in diverse graduate fields for broad multidisciplinary training in nonlinear systems early in their graduate careers. The program encourages students to engage in research that combines theory, computation and empirical data."
on complexity:
the following is from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system)
"A complex system is a system composed of interconnected parts that as a whole exhibit one or more properties (behavior among the possible properties) not obvious from the properties of the individual parts.
"A complex system is any system featuring a large number of interacting components, whose aggregate activity is nonlinear and typically exhibits self-organization under selective pressures.
"A system’s complexity may be of one of two forms: disorganized complexity and organized complexity.[1] In essence, disorganized complexity is a matter of a very large number of parts, and organized complexity is a matter of the subject system (quite possibly with only a limited number of parts) exhibiting emergent properties.
"Examples of complex systems include ant colonies, human economies and social structures, climate, nervous systems, cells and living things, including human beings, as well as modern energy or telecommunication infrastructures. Indeed, many systems of interest to humans are complex systems.
"Complex systems are studied by many areas of natural science, mathematics, and social science. Fields that specialize in the interdisciplinary study of complex systems include systems theory, complexity theory, systems ecology, and cybernetics."
Types of complex systems:
~ chaotic systems
~ complex adaptive systems (stock market, biosphere, brain, immune system, animal body cells, political parties, etc.)
~ nonlinear systems
Features of complex systems:
~ fuzzy boundaries
~ openness
~ memory
~ nested configuration
~ network multiplicity
~ emergent properties & behavior (as opposed to reductionism)
~ nonlinearity
~ positive feedback
the following, better exposition, is from
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Complex_systems (http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Complex_systems)
"Complexity is emerging as a post-Newtonian paradigm for approaching from a unifying point of view a large body of phenomena occurring in systems constituted by several subunits, at the crossroads of physical, engineering, environmental, life and human sciences. For a long time the idea prevailed that the perception of systems of this kind as complex arises from incomplete information, in connection with the presence of a large number of variables and parameters masking the underlying regularities. Over the years experimental data and theoretical breakthroughs challenging this view have become available, showing that Complexity is on the contrary rooted into the fundamental laws of physics. This realization opens the way to a systematic study of Complexity, which constitutes today a highly interdisciplinary, fast growing branch of science, drawing on the cross-fertilization of concepts and tools from nonlinear dynamics, statistical physics, probability and information theories, data analysis and numerical simulation.
"Traditionally, fundamental science explores the very small and the very large, both of which lie beyond man's everyday perception. The uniqueness of complex systems is that they have to do with a class of phenomena of fundamental importance in which the system and the observer may evolve on comparable time and space scales.
"A system perceived as complex induces a characteristic phenomenology the principal signature of which is the multiplicity of possible outcomes, endowing it with the capacity to choose, to explore and to adapt. This process can be manifested in different ways."
-
It seems that guittarman has more or less pointed out what I was going to say. I have to agree with it all, particularly the point that this is , ultimately, a forum devoted to making people healthy, the rawpalaeo aspect merely being the dominant theme. It is physically impossible, on any logical basis, for any one particular dietary approach(or even just 1 human being) to be able to provide 100% of the answers re health or anything else, as perfection doesn't exist in Nature.
-
Not sure I follow your reason, logic, or common sense. If it was required to eat like to properly nourish like then cows couldn't exist at all because they eat grass. As far as I know grass doesn't have a liver, heart, spleen, or anyother organ like a cow. The argument that like nourishes or cures like is simplistic nonsense. You are correct that many ancient (and some modern) cultures believe this stuff, but it doesn't make it true. What is does do is line the pockets of charlatans peddling this stuff to the uneducated.
Herbivores naturally eat plants so that is not the same issue. However, as has been pointed out before, carnivores and omnivores, when eating animals, tend to favour eating the organ-meats first, implying that they have superior value. Indeed, there are cases where animals just eat the organ-meats and leave(usually in times of plenty - an example being those killer-whales who just eat the tongue of a whale calf as the grey whales go on their migration). Same goes for herbivores, they don't always just aimlessly eat any old plants, sometimes they will single out specific raw plants for consumption, preferring them over others, due to a need to cure a certain condition(re herbs) or just in order to get superior nutrition. In other words, someone with a helthy liver may well not need to eat liver and can get by on variety, but another person with a diseased liver is highly likely to benefit if they include raw liver in their diet. Now, if one was eating the liver of an alien being from the Andromeda Galaxy, one could claim that nutrient-ratios/dna was so widely different that this would be unhealthy or just not beneficial, but cattle, for example, are hardly widely different from humans. Even fish, as I recall, share 40% of DNA with humans.
Another obvious point re herbal medicine is that the consumption of herbs by a herbivore can influence the taste/nutritional quality of the resulting meat, dramatically. Gary has pointed out how his beef's taste, for example, is particularly influenced(positively) by getting his cattle to eat clover, for example. So, not only can we benefit from herbs, directly, by eating raw herbs, but we can also benefit, indirectly, from eating herbivores which feed on various raw herbs.
No change in tune. My statement was that I was no longer totally convinced that organ meats are necessary. I still eat them in the form of my pet food mixture, but my observation has been that many who are doing zero carb are doing quite well on muscle meats alone. I also know that people have survived for long periods on pemmican as their only food with no organ meats at all, and have seemingly maintained perfect health. This sort of puts me in the position of the dying gangster who doesn't believe in God, calling in the priest for Last Rights just in case - soooo, I continue eating my small bit of organ meats, just in case. But I'm also willing to point out that there is a good bit of evidence that my previous reasoning on the need for organ meats may be pure folly.
Well, like I said, the fact that wild animals (non-herbivores)favour the organ-meats, first, does make it rather clear that eating just raw muscle-meats is a bad idea. And given mine and others' concerns re the highly toxic nature of pemmican, I seriously doubt any supposed health-claims by such pemmican-eaters. I mean, lightly-cooked fat is one thing, but rendered fat is far, far worse, as animal fats are particularly affected by heat re the creation of heat-created toxins.
As regards organ-meats, I tend to lean on the theory that they're particularly needed for specific things like fertility/growth-rate etc.(it's interesting to note that western sperm-counts have fallen dramatically over time, at about the same time people gave up on eating organ-meats(albeit cooked).
I have little experience or real knowledge in this area so must defer to others. My only actual experience in animal self medication that I can think of is that my cat chews grass when she gets fur balls and this makes her vomit the mess (including the bit of grass she ate) all over the rug. If this qualifies for animal self medication then I must admit that my cat 'medicates' herself with grass. I haven't had a fur ball lately and when I drank wheatgrass juice or vegetable juices it just made me nauseous, dizzy, and gave me loose smelly stools. I decided to stop self-medicating based on this experience. I've felt much better ever since.
Self-medication among animals isn't merely limited to carnivores eating grass. It's a standard practice among all animals. There are many other theories re cats eating grass(eg:-
"In his book, "Cat World" Desmond Morris points out that it is the juices of the grass that cats are interested in. It is known that these juices contain folic acid, a vitamin that is vital to cats as it helps in the production of haemoglobin. For a cat to be deficient in folic acid would stunt its growth and may cause anaemia."
The field of animal-self-medication is now such a big thing that it now has its own name and is currently a big field of study:-
http://nationalzoo.si.edu/publications/zoogoer/1998/1/reallywildremedies.cfm
It's called "zoopharmacognosy" and it seems that animals use herbs for all sorts of reasons, to induce labour, to get rid of parasites, to speed up healing of wounds, to get rid of insects etc. etc. Now, a raw animal food diet can do a lot of things but not those.
I only pointed out that a diet of raw animal foods of all types seem to increase libido in everyone who tries it. I haven't personally noticed raw oysters doing much more for me than a diet of raw red meat and fat - but that is my experience, YMMV.
Lex
I agree that a RAF/RVAF diet can improve libido. However, the fact that so many RPDers report having an increased sex-drive when they include raw oysters, over and above what they normally feel on a RPD diet, that makes it clear that singling out specific foods for specific conditions makes perfect sense.
-
Great stuff, guittarman, you made a lot of good points I was going to mention.
-
Cats eat grass for folic acid? or they could just eat meat...
-
Herbivores naturally eat plants so that is not the same issue. However, as has been pointed out before, carnivores and omnivores, when eating animals, tend to favour eating the organ-meats first, implying that they have superior value. Indeed, there are cases where animals just eat the organ-meats and leave(usually in times of plenty - an example being those killer-whales who just eat the tongue of a whale calf as the grey whales go on their migration). Same goes for herbivores, they don't always just aimlessly eat any old plants, sometimes they will single out specific raw plants for consumption, preferring them over others, due to a need to cure a certain condition(re herbs) or just in order to get superior nutrition. In other words, someone with a healthy liver may well not need to eat liver and can get by on variety, but another person with a diseased liver is highly likely to benefit if they include raw liver in their diet. Now, if one was eating the liver of an alien being from the Andromeda Galaxy, one could claim that nutrient-ratios/dna was so widely different that this would be unhealthy or just not beneficial, but cattle, for example, are hardly widely different from humans. Even fish, as I recall, share 40% of DNA with humans.
I've read much of this same stuff from the popular health gurus and none of it is ever supported by actual unbiased studies. Most people prefer Twinkies, french fries, and catsup to real healthful food. This doesn't mean that these things are in anyway supplying some important missing nutritional element. I also have some experience with coyotes and they don't seem to exhibit the same behavior that you discuss above. They often leave some of the entrails in favor of muscle meats. I've never believed and still don't believe this idea that we hunted large animals, ate the organs, and then let 80% of the animal go to waste. Makes zero sense considering the effort required to take down the animal. But you may believe whatever you wish.
Another obvious point re herbal medicine is that the consumption of herbs by a herbivore can influence the taste/nutritional quality of the resulting meat, dramatically. Gary has pointed out how his beef's taste, for example, is particularly influenced(positively) by getting his cattle to eat clover, for example. So, not only can we benefit from herbs, directly, by eating raw herbs, but we can also benefit, indirectly, from eating herbivores which feed on various raw herbs.
Yup, the taste of the meat is dependent on the food the animal eats. I've eaten clover, lucern, wheat grass, oat grass and other such stuff myself, and each has a flavor all it's own. Some are very sweet with a high level of monsaccarides - especially early in their development when they are tender. Preferring different grasses as they become available is far from medicinal in nature.
Well, like I said, the fact that wild animals (non-herbivores)favour the organ-meats, first, does make it rather clear that eating just raw muscle-meats is a bad idea. And given mine and others' concerns re the highly toxic nature of pemmican, I seriously doubt any supposed health-claims by such pemmican-eaters. I mean, lightly-cooked fat is one thing, but rendered fat is far, far worse, as animal fats are particularly affected by heat re the creation of heat-created toxins.
As regards organ-meats, I tend to lean on the theory that they're particularly needed for specific things like fertility/growth-rate etc.(it's interesting to note that western sperm-counts have fallen dramatically over time, at about the same time people gave up on eating organ-meats(albeit cooked).
Again, my personal experience with wild coyotes doesn't support the all organ meats all the time belief. I also find it interesting that you state pemmican is highly toxic in nature, however I've seen no evidence of this at all. What proof do you have that rendered animal fat is toxic to humans? I've seen theories put forth about free radicals and broken fatty acid chains, but no one has ever demonstrated any of this to cause any provable health problem. In fact, most people thrive on rendered animal fat - especially when compared to any type of vegetable fat. Do I believe that raw fat is better than rendered fat? Of course, but I see no evidence of rendered fat being "toxic" which is another word for poisonous - pure theoretical nonsense.
Self-medication among animals isn't merely limited to carnivores eating grass. It's a standard practice among all animals. There are many other theories re cats eating grass(eg:-
"In his book, "Cat World" Desmond Morris points out that it is the juices of the grass that cats are interested in. It is known that these juices contain folic acid, a vitamin that is vital to cats as it helps in the production of haemoglobin. For a cat to be deficient in folic acid would stunt its growth and may cause anaemia."
The field of animal-self-medication is now such a big thing that it now has its own name and is currently a big field of study:-
http://nationalzoo.si.edu/publications/zoogoer/1998/1/reallywildremedies.cfm
It's called "zoopharmacognosy" and it seems that animals use herbs for all sorts of reasons, to induce labour, to get rid of parasites, to speed up healing of wounds, to get rid of insects etc. etc. Now, a raw animal food diet can do a lot of things but not those.
Sure would like to know how Mr. Morris KNOWS what the cats are interested in. The grass that ends up on my carpet with my cat's fur balls is barely bruised so precious little in the way of any nutrient would be released and then the whole mess is vomited anyway. Folic acid? I don't care what Mr Morris pedigree is, that statement makes no sense. Far more likely the grass acts as an irritant - period. I've read a bit of Desmond Morris and found much of what he says is just his belief and are completely unsupported by any facts. His latest work on babies is just full of such tripe. I guess he's trying to be the Dr Spock of this generation and Dr. Spock's theories, once accepted as gospel, have been proven to be mostly worthless nonsense as well. Because something is written, doesn't make it so - regardless of the educational level of the author.
"Zoopharmacognosy" and the link you provided appears to be another one of those new 'sciences' designed to extract money from the pockets of taxpayers to fund research grants. None of this makes me believe that we have any business in prescribing herbal medicines to terminally ill patients because a monkey eats bitter pith wood, or cows perfer tender sweet clover in in the spring time.
I agree that a RAF/RVAF diet can improve libido. However, the fact that so many RPDers report having an increased sex-drive when they include raw oysters, over and above what they normally feel on a RPD diet, that makes it clear that singling out specific foods for specific conditions makes perfect sense.
To you it makes sense. My personal experience says that it's mostly nonsense combined with a large measure of wishful thinking. I used to believe much of this stuff as well, and recounted the wonderful benefits of each homeopathic remedy to anyone who would listen - even when my actual experience showed that they seldom had any value whatsoever. It's the power of suggestion.
Lex
-
I've read much of this same stuff from the popular health gurus and none of it is ever supported by actual unbiased studies. Most people prefer Twinkies, french fries, and catsup to real healthful food. This doesn't mean that these things are in anyway supplying some important missing nutritional element. I also have some experience with coyotes and they don't seem to exhibit the same behavior that you discuss above. They often leave some of the entrails in favor of muscle meats. I've never believed and still don't believe this idea that we hunted large animals, ate the organs, and then let 80% of the animal go to waste. Makes zero sense considering the effort required to take down the animal. But you may believe whatever you wish.
I never said that palaeo humans routinely left the muscle-meats - after all, most of the time they were in famine mode and ate anything available - it's just that hunter-gatherers routinely get at the organ-meats first, as large numbers of anthroplogists have noted numerous times. And your experience re coyotoes goes against the vast majority of wildlife experts who have seen the exact opposite and who have also published numerous reports re animals self-medicating.Secondly, the comments re twinkies is irrelevant to wild animals and patently absurd as, when they're not in contact with man, they don't have access to unnatural foods.
As regards the studies, there are actually a number out there, along with several books published by wildlife experts, despite the fact that zoopharmacognosy(study of self-medication re herbs among wild animals) is relatively recent(eg:-
http://www.ethnobotany.nl/research_abstract.htm
), so I'm afraid you're wrong re this.
Yup, the taste of the meat is dependent on the food the animal eats. I've eaten clover, lucern, wheat grass, oat grass and other such stuff myself, and each has a flavor all it's own. Some are very sweet with a high level of monsaccarides - especially early in their development when they are tender. Preferring different grasses as they become available is far from medicinal in nature.
Not true at all. Wild animals, much like humans, go in for variety, when they sense they're ill, as they sense something lacking in their diet. It's called instinct. And the point re different herbs/plants giving different nutrient profiles to meats is highly important as it shows that not all grassfed meat is exactly the same, and that we can benefit indirectly by eating such meats.
Again, my personal experience with wild coyotes doesn't support the all organ meats all the time belief. I also find it interesting that you state pemmican is highly toxic in nature, however I've seen no evidence of this at all. What proof do you have that rendered animal fat is toxic to humans? I've seen theories put forth about free radicals and broken fatty acid chains, but no one has ever demonstrated any of this to cause any provable health problem. In fact, most people thrive on rendered animal fat - especially when compared to any type of vegetable fat. Do I believe that raw fat is better than rendered fat? Of course, but I see no evidence of rendered fat being "toxic" which is another word for poisonous - pure theoretical nonsense.
Not theoretical nonsense at all! In fact, numerous studies on humans and animals(by now 1,000s) have shown that cooked animal fats are the unhealthiest of all foods as the toxins created from them form any number of unhealthy toxic compounds such as Advanced Glycation End Products, heterocylcic amines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons etc. I've already provided dozenss of such studies, among the 1000s available by now, here's one example among many:-
http://www.newcastleyoga.com.au/links/Food%20AGEs%20text.pdf
Notice that in all such studies, they point out, again and again, that the higher the temperature the animal food is cooked at the more heat-created toxins such as AGEs are created. So rendered fat is indeed pure poison, almost as bad as cooked trans-fats. The only saving grace re pemmican is that the lean meat with it can be raw(oh, and that some of the people who buy or make pemmican ensure it's from grassfed cattle). Well, all I can say is, I'm glad that this topic is in the hot topics section as all this pro-cooked-food guff is highly inappropriate.
Sure would like to know how Mr. Morris KNOWS what the cats are interested in. The grass that ends up on my carpet with my cat's fur balls is barely bruised so precious little in the way of any nutrient would be released and then the whole mess is vomited anyway. Folic acid? I don't care what Mr Morris pedigree is, that statement makes no sense. Far more likely the grass acts as an irritant - period. I've read a bit of Desmond Morris and found much of what he says is just his belief and are completely unsupported by any facts. His latest work on babies is just full of such tripe. I guess he's trying to be the Dr Spock of this generation and Dr. Spock's theories, once accepted as gospel, have been proven to be mostly worthless nonsense as well. Because something is written, doesn't make it so - regardless of the educational level of the author.
I didn't say that was the definitive answer, merely as 1 example among dozens of others for cats eating grass. And if it is indeed meant as an irritant, then fine it's a herb useful for getting rid of unwanted stomach-contents that the cat doesn't want. That is an example of herbal medicine, whether you like it or not.
"Zoopharmacognosy" and the link you provided appears to be another one of those new 'sciences' designed to extract money from the pockets of taxpayers to fund research grants. None of this makes me believe that we have any business in prescribing herbal medicines to terminally ill patients because a monkey eats bitter pith wood, or cows perfer tender sweet clover in in the spring time.
To you it makes sense. My personal experience says that it's mostly nonsense combined with a large measure of wishful thinking. I used to believe much of this stuff as well, and recounted the wonderful benefits of each homeopathic remedy to anyone who would listen - even when my actual experience showed that they seldom had any value whatsoever. It's the power of suggestion.
Lex
My own personal experience with homeopathy is that it does indeed have a dramatic beneficial effect on the symptoms one has(provided one takes the correct homeopathic product relevant to the condition) but never cures the underlying illness. Aajonus seems to be of like mind, apparently, and many others I've come across, concur.
As regards zoopharmacognosy, unfortunately, your beliefs are somewhat easily countered by the mass of evidence supporting the field now that science has advanced sufficiently to determine exactly what beneficial effects there are of the herbs these wild animals deliberately select at certain times. And in no way can zoopharmacognosy be compared to homeopathy as it's a field widely respected in the scientific community now that there's too much evidence of it, for it to be convincingly refuted.
What I find so amusing is that you attack what you call "New-Age" beliefs, yet you yourself display clear New-Age sentiments by attacking such a mainstream field as zoopharmacognosy, something now widely accepted in the field of biology.
-
My cat chews on grass sometimes and the way it looks to me is that he does it because it's fun. I found a bird feather today on a walk with him and he chased it when I threw it and then chewed on it while holding it down.
About rendered fat being toxic, what exactly is a toxin Tyler? I was under the impression it was something that caused negative effects at a certain dose, while poison is something that kills at a certain dose. Well we all know that anything at a certain dose can do both of those things, including water and protein. So how can "scientists" say that this or that chemical is a "toxin" and some other chemical isn't? Everything has a toxic dose. The only question is, what is that dose, and what are the toxic effects? Calling a chemical "toxic" is an ignorant shorthand that has it's place in general conversation but not scientific discussion.
-
My cat chews on grass sometimes and the way it looks to me is that he does it because it's fun. I found a bird feather today on a walk with him and he chased it when I threw it and then chewed on it while holding it down.
About rendered fat being toxic, what exactly is a toxin Tyler? I was under the impression it was something that caused negative effects at a certain dose, while poison is something that kills at a certain dose. Well we all know that anything at a certain dose can do both of those things, including water and protein. So how can "scientists" say that this or that chemical is a "toxin" and some other chemical isn't? Everything has a toxic dose. The only question is, what is that dose, and what are the toxic effects? Calling a chemical "toxic" is an ignorant shorthand that has it's place in general conversation but not scientific discussion.
First of all, the words toxin and poison are synonymous, meaning the same thing. The word poison doesn't only refer to something that kills at a certain dose , as there are poisons which merely cause injury or illness of some kind.
As regards the issue re everything being toxic at a high enough dose, that's not relevant to the discussion. After all, anything that is beneficial, like water or even raw meats, will be harmful if eaten in vast amounts that the body cannot handle. That doesn't, however, imply that raw meat and water are toxic, as the harm done is only caused by the human body's inability to handle more than a certain amount of these beneficial nutrients.
As regards the issue re heat-created toxins, a lot of cooked-food-advocates make the same point re excess water/toxicity. Unfortunately, it's based on a flaw of assumption as cooked-foods, unlike raw foods, are already somewhat toxic even in minor quantities, due to the heat-created toxins.In effect, you're saying that because rendered fat isn't as toxic as , say, meat burnt for hours until it becomes pure charcoal, that it must, therefore, be acceptable. That's a false premise. Besides, the fact that scientists have already shown that even boling creates such toxins, and the fact that scientists have also shown conclusive links between consumption of such toxin-rich cooked/processed foods and a higher incidence of many illnesses, means that there isn't any reason to defend rendered animal fat, either.
About the only arguments that could be made against my points above would be some scientific study that at least claimed either that a) humans have somehow developed a magical resistance towards such heat-created toxins or b) that humans are so adapted to eating cooked-foods that they now need to eat some heat-created toxins(from cooked-foods) in order to be healthy. This is going to take some doing given the many 1,000s of scientific studies out there which show that heat-created toxins in cooked foods are extremely unhealthy.
-
Tyler,
I read the study that you posted about AGE's etc, and then did a bit of further research on my own. All the studies I found only stated that AGE's are "believed" to have some negative affect or are believed to be "implicated" in health issues such as aging and heart disease, but no actual direct link or proof of cause and effect has been actually proven.
The specific study you site just made an effort to determine levels of AGE's in certain foods and again made no direct correlation of AGE's to any specific health conditions other than stating that it is believed to have some negative contributory effect. To extrapolate from this that pemmican made from rendered beef fat is "highly toxic" is a bit of a stretch - especially since no direct level of toxicity can be demostrated at all.
Lex
-
Tyler,
I read the study that you posted about AGE's etc, and then did a bit of further research on my own. All the studies I found only stated that AGE's are "believed" to have some negative affect or are believed to be "implicated" in health issues such as aging and heart disease, but no actual direct link or proof of cause and effect has been actually proven.
Lex
[/quote]
Responsible and authentic scientific studies never once state something as a fact, by themselves. They merely indicate strong links or connections. This is because science does NOT advance as a result of just 1 study, but as a result of 100s or 1000s(ie concensus). So, the fact that 1,000s of different studies variously damn AGEs and other heat-created toxins as extremely damaging to human health(re diabetes or whatever condition), with no single study proving the so-called "benefits"(lol) of consuming toxin-rich(ie "AGE-rich") cooked-foods like pemmican means that you have not only substantial data showing damage to cooked-food re such heat-created toxins but also you have no evidence to show the benefits of having such heat-created toxins in foods like pemmican, either. Case closed.
-
Lex
Responsible and authentic scientific studies never once state something as a fact, by themselves. They merely indicate strong links or connections. This is because science does NOT advance as a result of just 1 study, but as a result of 100s or 1000s(ie concensus). So, the fact that 1,000s of different studies variously damn AGEs and other heat-created toxins as extremely damaging to human health(re diabetes or whatever condition), with no single study proving the so-called "benefits"(lol) of consuming toxin-rich(ie "AGE-rich") cooked-foods like pemmican means that you have not only substantial data showing damage to cooked-food re such heat-created toxins but also you have no evidence to show the benefits of having such heat-created toxins in foods like pemmican, either. Case closed.
Case may be closed for you, but since none of the studies show any actual toxic effect from AGE's in the real world, and only discuss "theoretical" damage that free radicals "might" cause, the jury is still out for me. Remember all those "1,000s of studies" that showed "strong links" or "connections" of cholesterol with heart disease - and they were all nonsense. The bigger picture says carbs and high levels of blood glucose are far more damaging than AGEs and can be proven to cause undesired responses in the body.
For health, I'll take cooked meat and fat anyday over carbs of any kind. You see, I'm far more concerned with getting the MACRO nutrients right, (eating fat and protein and eliminating most carbohydrates) than agonizing over relatively minor issues like freezing, dehydrating, or even cooking. If you're eating crap to begin with, freezing, dehydrating, and cooking are totaly irrelevent. Supposed toxins like AGEs and free radicals are a waste of time to worry over and divert attention away from the far more important issue of eating the correct foods in the first place.
Lex
-
Heterocyclic Amines in Cooked Meats
Recent studies have further evaluated the relationship associated with methods of cooking meat and the development of specific types of cancer. One study conducted by researchers from NCI's Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics found a link between individuals with stomach cancer and the consumption of cooked meats. The researchers assessed the diets and cooking habits of 176 people diagnosed with stomach cancer and 503 people without cancer. The researchers found that those who ate their beef medium-well or well-done had more than three times the risk of stomach cancer than those who ate their beef rare or medium-rare. They also found that people who ate beef four or more times a week had more than twice the risk of stomach cancer than those consuming beef less frequently. Additional studies have shown that an increased risk of developing colorectal, pancreatic, and breast cancer is associated with high intakes of well-done, fried, or barbequed meats ...
References
1. Adamson RH, Thorgeirsson UP. Carcinogens in foods: Heterocyclic amines and cancer and heart disease. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 1995; 369:211-220.
2. Adamson RH, Thorgeirsson UP, Snyderwine EG, et al. Carcinogenicity of 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f] quinoline in nonhuman primates: Induction of tumors in three macaques. Japanese Journal of Cancer Research 1990; 81(1):10-14.
3. Bjeldanes LF, Morris MM, Felton JS, et al. Mutagens from the cooking of food. II. Survey by Ames/Salmonella test of mutagen formation in the major protein-rich foods of the American diet. Food and Chemical Toxicology 1982; 20(4):357-363.
4. Bjeldanes LF, Morris MM, Timourian H, Hatch FT. Effects of meat composition and cooking conditions on mutagen formation in fried ground beef. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 1983; 31(1):18-21.
5. Bogen KT. Cancer potencies of heterocyclic amines found in cooked foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology 1994; 32(6):505-515.
6. Dolara P, Commoner B, Vithayathil A, et al. The effect of temperature on the formation of mutagens in heated beef stock and cooked ground beef. Mutation Research 1979; 60(3):231-237.
7. Esumi H, Ohgaki H, Kohzen E, Takayama S, Sugimura T. Induction of lymphoma in CDF1 mice by the food mutagen, 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b] pyridine. Japanese Journal of Cancer Research 1989; 80(12):1176-1178.
8. Felton JS, Fultz E, Dolbeare FA, Knize MG. Effect of microwave pretreatment on heterocyclic aromatic amine mutagens/carcinogens in fried beef patties. Food Chemical Toxicology 1994; 32(10):897-903.
9. Felton JS, Knize MG, Shen NH, et al. Identification of the mutagens in cooked beef. Environmental Health Perspectives 1986; 67:17-24.
10. Felton JS, Knize MG, Wood C, et al. Isolation and characterization of new mutagens from fried ground beef. Carcinogenesis 1984; 5(1):95-102.
11. Hayatsu, H. Mutagens in food: detection and prevention. Florida, CRC Press, 1991.
12. Knize MG, Sinha R, Rothman N, et al. Heterocyclic amine content in fast-food meat products. Food and Chemical Toxicology 1995; 33(7):545-551.
13. Layton DW, Bogen KT, Knize MG, et al. Cancer risk of heterocyclic amines in cooked foods: An analysis and implications for research. Carcinogenesis 1995; 16(1):39-52.
14. Murray S, Gooderham NJ, Boobis AR, Davies DS. Detection and measurement of MelQx in human urine after ingestion of a cooked meat meal. Carcinogenesis 1989; 10(4):763-765.
15. Muscat JE, Wynder EL. The consumption of well-done meat and the risk of colorectal cancer. American Journal of Public Health 1994; 84(5):856-858.
16. Nader CJ, Spencer LK, Weller RA. Mutagen production during pan-broiling compared with microwave irradiation of beef. Cancer Letter 1981; 13(2):147-152.
17. Pariza MW, Ashoor SH, Chu FS, Lund DB. Effects of temperature and time on mutagen formation in pan-fried hamburger. Cancer Letter 1979; 7(2-3):63-69.
18. Sinha R, Rothman N, Brown ED, et al. High concentrations of the carcinogen 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) occur in chicken but are dependent on cooking method. Cancer Research 1995; 55(20):4516-4519.
19. Snyderwine EG. Some perspectives on the nutritional aspects of breast cancer research. Food-derived heterocyclic amines as etiologic agents in human mammary cancer. Cancer 1994; 74(3 Supplement):1070-1077.
20. Stavric B. Biological significance of trace levels of mutagenic heterocycylic aromatic amines in human diet: A critical review. Food and Chemical Toxicology 1994; 32(10):977-994.
21. Wakabayashi K, Ushiyama H, Takahashi M, et al. Exposure to heterocyclic amines. Environmental Health Perspectives 1993; 99:129-134.
-
Many healthy primitives ate a mostly carb based diet (tubers, fruit, vegetables), with some saturated fats. A good metabolism will keep blood glucose level constant even if the majority of calories come from carbohydrates.
but...
most people today have a wrecked carb metabolism and malabsorb sugars because of eating refined foods for years, so a high fat diet will in many cases be the best option.
-
Case may be closed for you, but since none of the studies show any actual toxic effect from AGE's in the real world, and only discuss "theoretical" damage that free radicals "might" cause, the jury is still out for me. Remember all those "1,000s of studies" that showed "strong links" or "connections" of cholesterol with heart disease - and they were all nonsense. The bigger picture says carbs and high levels of blood glucose are far more damaging than AGEs and can be proven to cause undesired responses in the body.
For health, I'll take cooked meat and fat anyday over carbs of any kind. You see, I'm far more concerned with getting the MACRO nutrients right, (eating fat and protein and eliminating most carbohydrates) than agonizing over relatively minor issues like freezing, dehydrating, or even cooking. If you're eating crap to begin with, freezing, dehydrating, and cooking are totaly irrelevent. Supposed toxins like AGEs and free radicals are a waste of time to worry over and divert attention away from the far more important issue of eating the correct foods in the first place.
Lex
This is one of the best posts in a long time here. What I really respect about you, Lex, is that you speak in terms of your own experience. Your ego is not getting in the way. You are not out to 'prove' you are right about something. You simply cut through the clutter and use some common sense. You are such a rare breed in this regard.
For my health, I know that a diet containing some cooked foods is far better than an all raw diet containing carb foods. While raw foods are important in the diet, I don't have to eat 100% raw to feel really great. And besides, certain cooking methods are much less harmful than others - like braising and other liquid cooking methods. Also, marinating a piece of meat and then grilling it will reduce the heterocyclic amines in foods by up to 90%. Simmering bones to get the minerals and connective tissues out is very health-promoting for me personally. I will continue to eat bone stocks.
We have been cooking (250kya) longer than we have been eating Neolithic foods (10kya), after all. Much longer.
-
For my health, I know that a diet containing some cooked foods is far better than an all raw diet containing carb foods. While raw foods are important in the diet, I don't have to eat 100% raw to feel really great. And besides, certain cooking methods are much less harmful than others - like braising and other liquid cooking methods. Also, marinating a piece of meat and then grilling it will reduce the heterocyclic amines in foods by up to 90%. Simmering bones to get the minerals and connective tissues out is very health-promoting for me personally. I will continue to eat bone stocks.
We have been cooking (250kya) longer than we have been eating Neolithic foods (10kya), after all. Much longer.
But isn't this forum all about promoting RAW Paleo?
And in my healing terminal illnesses sources, 100% raw is needed, not bone stocks. The terribly sick will throw up cooked meats and cooked fats. This is how I surmise that raw is best.
-
But isn't this forum all about promoting RAW Paleo?
And in my healing terminal illnesses sources, 100% raw is needed, not bone stocks. The terribly sick will throw up cooked meats and cooked fats. This is how I surmise that raw is best.
Sure, but many people are eating cooked foods, even though they are on the forum. I was not promoting cooking. I was stating a fact that we have been cooking longer than we have been eating grains. If you don't like me here, why don't you just delete my account?
-
And not only that, I happen to be posting in "Hot Topics" and thus, non raw topics are okay. But like I said, if you have an issue with me, remove me. Or better yet, why don't you just leave me alone and post something of worth yourself?
-
Sure, but many people are eating cooked foods, even though they are on the forum. I was not promoting cooking. I was stating a fact that we have been cooking longer than we have been eating grains. If you don't like me here, why don't you just delete my account?
Hmm.... hot blooded reply... constant threats of deleting your account....
And not only that, I happen to be posting in "Hot Topics" and thus, non raw topics are okay. But like I said, if you have an issue with me, remove me. Or better yet, why don't you just leave me alone and post something of worth yourself?
hmmm... implying I have issues with you... If you read my simple reply, I indicated nothing of the sort. You are imagining reading in between the lines that are non-existent.
Take a cold paleo dip shower under the waterfall and smile. ;D
--------
Here is a review of my previous reply which is ON TOPIC regarding animal medicine:
But isn't this forum all about promoting RAW Paleo?
And in my healing terminal illnesses sources, 100% raw is needed, not bone stocks. The terribly sick will throw up cooked meats and cooked fats. This is how I surmise that raw is best.
-
Why don't you address Lex then, since he is the first one to have brought up cooked foods in this thread? I suppose it's easier for you to bully a woman. You don't impress me one bit.
-
Sure, but many people are eating cooked foods, even though they are on the forum. I was not promoting cooking.
The vast majority of people on the various raw forums out there , are, however, not eating any cooked-foods for health(lol) but only consume them due to social pressure from SAD-eaters, if that.
And suggesting bone-broth does constitute promoting cooking, but you're quite right hot topics is the right forum for that sort of subject - it really doesn't matter whether mcdonald's hamburgers are being recommended or a raw vegan lifestyle or whatever, as long as it's all put here for discussion.
-
Sure, but many people are eating cooked foods, even though they are on the forum. I was not promoting cooking. I was stating a fact that we have been cooking longer than we have been eating grains.
Perhaps, but that doesn't by any means, imply that we are adapted to cooking. After all, wild animals take millions of years to change their diets to a radically different one, and those diets don't even involve changing to something as alien in nature as cooked foods. If you look at the beyondveg.com timeline, you'll also find that transitioning from 1 type of raw diet(eg:- fruitarian) to a mostly-meat one took our apemen ancestors vastly longer than 250,000 years, and those diets I'm referring to didn't even involve cooked, pre-250,000 years ago:-
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/hb/hb-interview1c.shtml
And our hominid/apemen ancestors have been eating raw plant foods in the Palaeolithic era for far, far longer than we've been eating cooked-foods(eg:-
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1514032.htm
-
And besides, certain cooking methods are much less harmful than others - like braising and other liquid cooking methods. Also, marinating a piece of meat and then grilling it will reduce the heterocyclic amines in foods by up to 90%.
Some cooking methods are less harmful than others, but all are still harmful. After all, enzymes are destroyed along with bacteria with cooking, and even mild cooking adds on a load of heat-created toxins.
The claim re marinating and then grilling a piece of meat reducing heterocyclic amines in foods by 90% is rather misleading. For one thing, the study referred to(:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/4031158/Marinating-steak-in-beer-or-wine-reduces-cancer-chemicals.html
)
mentioned specifically that only 2-3 types of heterocyclic amines(of the 17 or so in total) were reduced, making it a bit pointless. Even worse, the study involved marinating in beer(recommended as more effective in wine). Now , alcohol is a toxin so recommending to remove toxins while marinating meats in another toxin, beer, is not a good idea.
And, of course, other than the remaining types of heterocyclic amines, there are also advanced glycation endproducts(AGEs), nitrosamines(NSAs), PAHs(polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) etc. Now, naturally, reducing the cooking-temperature, cooking foods in water and other gimmicks can also help, to a very limited extent, re reducing the overall toxicity of cooked-foods, but not by enough to make any real , meaningful difference. Better to just stick to eating raw animal foods.
-
Many healthy primitives ate a mostly carb based diet (tubers, fruit, vegetables), with some saturated fats. A good metabolism will keep blood glucose level constant even if the majority of calories come from carbohydrates.
I think you may be referring to the Kitavans. At least someone recently mentioned them doing the above type of diet.
-
Case may be closed for you, but since none of the studies show any actual toxic effect from AGE's in the real world, and only discuss "theoretical" damage that free radicals "might" cause, the jury is still out for me. Remember all those "1,000s of studies" that showed "strong links" or "connections" of cholesterol with heart disease - and they were all nonsense. The bigger picture says carbs and high levels of blood glucose are far more damaging than AGEs and can be proven to cause undesired responses in the body.
The trouble is that the evidence re carbs is even less compelling than the evidence re cooked animal fats/heat-created toxins etc. The sheer numbers of papers re the latter prove my point whereas most of the data re carbs/blood-sugar seems to originate from Creationist websites such as biblelife.org, barry groves et al(I note that Barry groves made an excuse and fled the rawpaleodiet group because he was quite unable to effectively counter the points we made re heat-created toxins in cooked-foods. And, yet, Barry is THE guru for the various anti-carb theories out there.
As regards claims of statistics, that's very misleading. There are plenty of studies featuring heat-created toxins which involve in vitro studies of the direct, very unhealthy effects of AGEs/advanced glycation end products on living (human or animal) cells:-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9079706
(so , in other words, the chemical effect of AGEs on the human body is well understood)
then there are studies focusing on how there are direct connections between the amounts of AGEs in the body and the incidence of numerous age-related illnesses such as Alzheimer's:-
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0G-3P69T2Y-19&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=65bfdac1fe363e31c57f1a16726d6d6f
Re cholesterol/saturated fat claims:- ironically, scientists have recently suggested that there is a much more likely explanation for the frequently-reported increased ill-health of people on diets consisting of high levels of cooked animal food. They have pointed out that all the studies focusing on the dangers of saturated fats, while they were correct in their results, they failed to realise that it was the heat-created toxins in the cooked-animal foods of the diets they studied which were the cause of the greatly-increased rates of illnesses:-
Another confounding issue may be the formation of exogenous (outside the body) advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs) and oxidation products generated during cooking, which it appears some of the studies have not controlled for. It has been suggested that, "given the prominence of this type of food in the human diet, the deleterious effects of high-(saturated)fat foods may be in part due to the high content in glycotoxins, above and beyond those due to oxidized fatty acid derivatives." The glycotoxins, as he called them, are more commonly called AGEs" :-
http://www.pnas.org/content/94/12/6474.long
For health, I'll take cooked meat and fat anyday over carbs of any kind. You see, I'm far more concerned with getting the MACRO nutrients right, (eating fat and protein and eliminating most carbohydrates) than agonizing over relatively minor issues like freezing, dehydrating, or even cooking. If you're eating crap to begin with, freezing, dehydrating, and cooking are totaly irrelevent. Supposed toxins like AGEs and free radicals are a waste of time to worry over and divert attention away from the far more important issue of eating the correct foods in the first place.
Lex
The trouble is that the vast majority of Raw Animal Foodists have experiences, quite counter to yours. That is, they'll get nasty side-effects/detox(much like a hangover) , within 24 hours, from cheating and eating cooked animal fat(or cooked food in general)(ie crap) whereas if they eat a little raw organic fruit, there will be no such side-effects(often no side-effects, either, from eating even nonorganic fruit). Now, I don't doubt that the zero-carb minority are an exception. I remember myself experiencing awful issues with carbs if I went too VLC for extremely long periods(VLC, in this case, involving 1 piece of fruit every 2 weeks at most). This had nothing, however, to do with the carbs being "bad" in any way, it was simply that once I went VLC for long periods, my body became hopeless at handling more and more carbs(due to lack of the correct bacteria as the bacteria were starved for lack of carbs etc.). Of course, as soon as I readded carbs in quantity back into my diet, such side-effects disappeared completely and I was right as rain, again. So, carbs are not bad at all, it's just a question of whether you're doing zero-carb or not(or VLC for long periods). But, of course, much like with animal fat(re yours and mine experiences re this), it's not a good idea to splurge on carbs, either, everything in moderation.
-
Why don't you address Lex then, since he is the first one to have brought up cooked foods in this thread? I suppose it's easier for you to bully a woman. You don't impress me one bit.
Oh now you bring up "bullying" and the "woman card" tsk tsk.
Everyone else is having a nice cerebral time enjoying the hot thread.
Cerebral arguments are bonding exercises.
Just stay on topic and let the animal medicine thread live on.
-
I was referred to this passage by a RAFer I know:-
here's a
> quote from the Summary of Holistic Cancer Therapy in "Overcoming
> Cancer" by Walter Last:
>
>
>
> "Furthermore, [in cancer] there is commonly a deterioration in the
> lipid (fat-related) composition of the cell walls that allows toxins
> to enter the cells, and prevents waste residue from being removed. The
> main cause of this deterioration is the habitual consumption of heated
> or oxidized fats, and a deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids as in fish
> oils and linseed oil [and, he should have added, in grassfed animal
> fat]."
>
taken from:-
http://www.health-science-spirit.com/cancer1-overview.html